Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing (MTV) (202207349)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202207349

Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing

31 October 2023

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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the:
1. Resident’s reports of a leak in the property.
2. Resident’s reports of damp and mould forming and their request for a decant.
3. The associated complaint.

Background and summary of events

The resident has an assured shorthold tenancy with the landlord. The property is a two-bedroom ground floor flat. The tenancy started on 17 December 2014.
The resident lives with her husband and three children. The landlord has recorded that the resident has advised that her eldest daughter has disabilities.

Scope of the investigation

This Service acknowledges that the resident has explained how the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould significantly impacted her daughter’s physical health, particularly the damp and mould in the property being the cause of their resident’s daughter having a number of hospitalisations. The Ombudsman cannot draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. This is outside our jurisdiction, but consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience that may have been caused to the resident and her family.

The landlord’s obligations

Under Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the landlord is obliged to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the dwelling house. This obligation is confirmed in section 2.3 of the tenancy agreement.
The resident’s tenancy agreement states the landlord will keep the property in good repair the structure and exterior of the property. This includes carry out repairs for which it is responsible within a reasonable time, giving priority to urgent repairs.
The landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy states that emergency repairs should be responded to within 24 hours. It also says that routine repairs should be responded to within 20 working days and non-routine repairs within 90 days.
The landlord’s repair and maintenance policy go on to state that major leaks will be responded to as an emergency.
Under sections 9A and 10 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (as amended), the landlord was under a duty to ensure the property was fit for human habitation, including free from mould.
The Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) is concerned with avoiding or minimizing potential hazards. The landlord has a responsibility to keep a property free from category one hazards, including protection from infection and damp and mould.
With reference to damp and mould, the HHSRS says that the possible health effects include breathing difficulties caused by mould as well as depression and anxiety. Preventive measures include damp proof courses, properly installed drainage, and adequate extraction of moisture laden air during peak times, like cooking, bathing, and laundry.
The landlord’s decant policy states that residents may be required to be decanted from their existing property into alternative accommodation if the landlord is carrying out major work or improvement works. Additionally, if emergency repairs need to take place following an event such as a floor or fire.
The landlord’s decant policy also states it may offer a resident a permanent move if the repairs work needed on a property may be so extensive it would not be practical and/or economically to sell of redevelop the property. In this case, the landlord will make all reasonable efforts to meet the resident’s needs.
The landlord has a two stage complaints procedure which states:
1. At stage one the landlord should acknowledge the complaint within five working days and provide a formal response within ten working days.
2. At stage two, the landlord should acknowledge a complaint within five working days and provide a full and final response within 14 days following a full investigation of the complaint.
The landlord’s compensation policy states it may consider an offer of compensation or good will when it has, through its own actions or inactions, failed to deliver services of an acceptable standard.

Summary of events

On 28 July 2021, the resident contacted the landlord to report a leak in her bathroom. On the same day the landlord raised a repair report stating that the resident reported a leak from the extractor fan in the bathroom, causing water to gather on the floor. The landlord noted a target date of 25 August 2021.
On 19 August 2021, the resident returned from holiday to find the leak had not been fixed. Therefore, the resident contacted the landlord again.
The resident contacted the landlord on 22 September 2021, to complain that the leak was still there. The resident said she still did not have lights or a fan extractor working in the bathroom. The resident went onto say that this was impacting on her eldest daughter as she was scared of the dark. Therefore, will not have a bath.
The landlord contacted the resident on 27 September 2021 to confirm that repair work was due to take place on 4 October 2021.
The resident contacted the landlord on 9 October 2021, to advise that the electricity was not working in the property. An emergency electrician came the same day and fixed the electricity in the property. The electrician removed the light bulb in the toilet. The electrician noted that the light bulb was full of water.
The resident complained to the landlord, on 10 October 2021, that since July 2021 the bathroom in the upstairs flat had been leaking into her property. The resident said this left her without a fan and light in the bathroom. The resident confirmed that the bathroom has no window. Therefore, her eldest child has been afraid to have a bath without the light. As such, her eldest daughter had been having a bath in the living room in a plastic bathtub. The resident said due to her child’s disabilities when she was sick, she was unable to have a shower.
The resident complained that the landlord kept cancelling appointments or when the landlord has sent people to look nothing was actioned. As such, the resident said the leak was getting worse and has extended to in the toilet and living room. The resident noted that she therefore did not have a light in the toilet either. The resident reported that children were having to step in the water. The resident went on to say that due to the lack of repairs she was only going to pay half the rent as only half of the house is in good order. The resident requested for the landlord to complete the repairs.
On 6 October 2021, the landlord attended a neighbouring property, which was above the resident’s flat on the first floor of the building, to investigate cause of the leak. The landlord did not find a cause of the leak in the first-floor property and reported that it had been unable to access the resident’s property.
The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 11 October 2021 and advised that it aimed to provide a response within 10 working days.
On 13 October 2021, the landlord contacted the resident to confirm that its repair contractors would be attending the 3 affected flats on 18 October 2021. The resident responded the same day to ask the landlord to confirm when it would repair the leak and why there was a delay completing the repairs.
On 22 October 2021, the landlord contacted the resident to apologise for repair contractors not attending on 18 October 2021. The landlord said it needed to access all 3 of the affected properties at the same time, however, it was struggling to get a date from another resident to arrange the joint visit. The landlord said it would continue to establish a convenient date for all resident’s and apologised for the delay in providing its complaint response. The landlord said it aimed to provide a response in 10 days.
The landlord contacted the resident on 26 October 2021, to apologise that it missed the plumbing appointment arranged for that day. The landlord advised this was due to a computer error. The landlord rearranged the appointment for 19 November 2021.
The landlord provided its stage one complaint response on 29 October 2021. In its response the landlord said:
1. It was upholding the complaint.
2. The delay in completing repairs was due to the fact it could not gain access to all 3 affected properties at the same time. Therefore, its contractors were unable to carry out a full investigation. With this in mind, it relied upon testing to source the issue.
3. It apologised for the delay and stress this caused. The landlord said it appreciated the resident’s frustration.
4. It had provided feedback to the manager of its team to prevent it happening again.
5. It confirmed that an appointment had been arranged with all 3 of the affected properties for 19 November 2021.
6. It requested for the resident’s lighting in her bathroom to be reinstated as a priority as soon as the leak repaired.
7. The landlord offered compensation of £100. This included:
  1. £60 for time and trouble.
  2. £30 for service failure.
  3. £10 for the missed appointment.
On 19 November 2021, the landlord attended the resident’s home but was unable to carry out the repair to stop the leak in the property.
The landlord attended the property again on 22 November 2021. The landlord opened the main water valve for the flat block. This confirmed that the leak was coming from the flat on the second floor of the building. The landlord arranged for a plumber and a carpenter to attend the second floor flat.
The resident contacted the landlord on 22 November 2021. The resident said the leak had led to a ‘big flood’ in the bathroom. The resident reported that this led to the light switch in the hallway making a sizzle sound due to water pouring down the walls. The resident reported damage to the carpet in the hallway and water coming down the wall in the living room. The resident said she called out an emergency electrician who made safe the hallway light. The resident asked the landlord to move properties due to the dangerous conditions.
On the 24 November 2021, the landlord raised a repair order to repair kitchen sink waste in the neighbour’s property. These works included removing old panels to get to the burst pipes and this was completed on 1 December 2021.
On 18 January 2022, the resident’s representative contacted the landlord to complete the repairs or to decant the family into temporary accommodation. They also asked the landlord to pay compensation for the resident’s distress.
On 17 February 2022, the resident contacted the landlord to request a reimbursement for damages to household items such as a carpet which has led to financial loss. The resident also requested reimbursement for the impact the leak and subsequent repairs had on the family’s health.
The resident requested the landlord progress the complaint to stage two on 18 February 2022. The landlord acknowledged the residents request 4 days later on 22 February 2022 and advised that it would provide its stage two response by 11 March 2022.
The landlord was sent a request for inspection on 3 March 2022 when the resident sent pictures of the property showing the damp and mould. The landlord said electricians needed to return and recommission bathroom, toilet, and hallway lights and to repair the electrical fan in the bathroom following the leak. The landlord noted that repairs needed to take place after the 8 March 2022 as resident was isolating.
On 23 March 2022, the landlord contacted the resident to apologise for the delay in providing its stage two complaint response. The landlord provided the resident with its insurers details to make a claim for damages.
The landlord attended the property on 15 April 2022, to complete an assessment including taking photos of damage to the walls, floors, and personal items. The resident contacted the landlord the same day to say she had provided photos of the damage in March 2022. The resident said she thought the assessment was to make a plan for repairs and, as such, the landlord came to the property for no reason.
On 16 April 2022, the landlord contacted the resident. The landlord confirmed it had attended the property, but the resident was not happy for an inspection to take place. The landlord asked the resident if a further inspection could take place and asked the resident to confirm what date was best for it to attend. The landlord provided four dates it could visit and confirmed it would not take any pictures as per the resident’s request. The resident responded the same day with available dates.
The landlord contacted the resident on 16 April 2022 to confirm that a further appointment to assess the property had been arranged for 21 April 2022.
On 21 April 2022, the landlord agreed to redecorate the bathroom and toilet, and the kitchen and hallway. Additionally, it would apply mould treatment in the living room and both bedrooms.
The landlord contacted the resident on 15 May 2022 to apologise the delay in providing its stage two complaint response. The landlord confirmed it would complete redecoration in the kitchen bathroom, toilet, and renewing the bathroom door. Also, it would complete mould treatment in the living room and bedrooms.
On 17 May 2022, the resident’s representative contacted the landlord. The representative said the resident was concerned that the level of work required meant it was not safe for the family. The resident representative asked the landlord to provide reassurance that the work would not impact on their health.
The landlord contacted the resident on 18 May 2022 to confirm it had contacted its repair teams to reach an agreement for commencing work. The landlord confirmed that the damp proof cleaner used was not toxic and asked the resident to be open to the work starting.
On 20 May 2022, the landlord contacted the resident. The landlord confirmed it would be upholding the complaint and awarding compensation. The landlord said it will complete the repairs as soon as possible and address any further issues if they arise once the leak was repaired.
The resident contacted the landlord on 7 June 2022 to say that she remained concerned about the smell of bleach in her eldest child’s bedroom. The resident said despite the leak at end of November 2021 redecoration has not taken place.
Following the resident raising concerns with her local authority, the local authority contacted the landlord on 7 June 2022 to say that the landlord needed to repair the severe mould in the property. The local authority confirmed it had received pictures and videos of the mould from the resident. The landlord confirmed that work was scheduled to take place soon.
Between the 14 June and 16 June 2022, the landlords records show completion of all outstanding repair work. This included plastering and mould treatment wash to the kitchen, bathroom, hall, living room and both bedrooms. The resident confirmed work to the children’s bedroom was not completed and provided pictures. The resident advised that her eldest daughter was having major surgery on 26 June 2022. Therefore, the landlord and the resident agreed that no redecoration work would take place for six weeks after the date of the operation.
The landlord contacted the resident on 23 June 2022 to apologise that repairs were not completed within a reasonable timeframe. The landlord requested that the resident provide any costs incurred for it to consider whether to reimburse or to signpost the resident to its insurers.
The landlord provided its stage two complaint response on 24 June 2022. In its response:
1. The landlord said it had upheld the complaint at stage one of its complaint process.
2. The landlord apologised for the delays and inconvenience this caused the resident and her family.
3. It confirmed that repairs had been completed to prevent further water ingress to the resident’s home.
4. The landlord agreed to complete decorative works when it was convenient to the resident, and asked the resident to contact it when she could accommodate a decorating appointment.
5. The landlord advised the resident to make a claim with its insurers.
6. Offered compensation of £800. This consisted of:
  1. £300 for time and trouble.
  2. £300 for service failure.
  3. £150 for poor complaint handling
  4. £50 for missed appointments.
The resident contacted the landlord the same day to say she would not accept compensation.

Post complaint

The landlord contacted the resident on 26 August 2022 to arrange for the property to be redecorated. The resident advised she was away, so the landlord agreed for its contractor to call the following week.
In correspondence with this Service in June 2023 the resident said despite the landlord completing some damp proofing in the property the walls are still wet. The children’s bedroom still remains to be repaired. The resident provided pictures of the outstanding work.

Assessment and findings

When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman considers its Dispute Resolution Principles. This is good practice guidance developed from the Ombudsman’s experience of resolving disputes for use by everyone involved in the complaints process. There are three principles driving effective dispute resolution:
1. Be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair processes.
2. Put things right.
3. Learn from outcomes.

The resident’s reports of a leak in the property

In this case, it is not disputed that there were delays in completing work to the resident’s property following her report of a water leak into her property from a flat above. The landlord has acknowledged and apologised for the time taken to complete repairs and for the inconvenience caused.
In the resident’s communication with this Service, the resident remains dissatisfied with the level of compensation offered. The resident was clear in her assertion that the landlord’s delay in fixing the leak led to damp and mould appearing. Additionally, the resident said the landlord failed to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused to the family as a consequence.
The records show that the resident initially contacted the landlord on 28 July 2021. The resident said there was a leak coming from her extractor fan in the bathroom which led to the fan ceasing to work. The evidence provided by the landlord shows that it raised a repair report with a target date to fix by 25 August 2021.
The records go on to show that four months later on 22 November 2021 the landlord found the cause of the leak. The repair notes confirm that the leak was coming from the flat on the second floor of the building. Following this, the leak was repaired on 1 December 2021.
It is this Service’s view that a delay of four months to repair the leak was not appropriate as it is not in line with the landlord’s own repair obligations to complete routine repairs within 20 working days.
In the four months the landlord took to stop the leak it faced difficulty in obtaining access to all 3 affected properties at the same time. The landlord’s records show that on 6 October 2021 it attended the flat above the resident’s but was unable to find a cause of the leak. The same day, the landlord attended the resident’s property, but the resident did not allow access. As such, the landlord said it was unable to complete a survey which was reasonable at this time due to it being unable to access the property.
The evidence shows that the landlord proposed an appointment for 18 October 2021 to attend all 3 properties to complete a survey. However, one of the residents was not available at this time. Due to this, the landlord was unable to continue with its proposed appointment.
Whilst this Service recognises the difficulties it faced in accessing the affected properties, this does not negate that the landlord was not proactive between July and October 2021.
During this time, the resident contacted the landlord on 22 July 2021, 19 August 2021, 22 September 2021, 10 and 25 October 2021 expressing her concern that the leak was getting worse. The resident said that there were puddles of water forming in the lounge and in the hall, and water was ‘pouring’ down the walls and causing the light switch in the hall to make sizzling sounds. The resident also reported that all the electrics in the hall no longer functioned.
The resident reported that water was running down the walls on 22 September 2021. This should have been classified as an emergency repair, as it could have caused significant risk to the resident’s safety, or significant damage to the property, and the landlord should have made this safe within 24 hours as per its own repair policy.

From the evidence provided the landlord did not attend the property until 15 working days later on 6 October 2021. Therefore, the landlord was not proactive in making the property safe. In this case, this Service would have expected the landlord to have taken steps to mitigate the issues identified to prevent the family being at risk.
In addition, there is no evidence to suggest that the landlord considered or assessed the potential risks to the resident and her family. Particularly, as the resident reported that the leak was causing issues to the electricity in the property and that there were hazard arising from pools of water forming on the property floor. The landlord was aware of the vulnerabilities within the resident’s household, but it has provided no evidence to suggest that the risk was assessed and if it considered any reasonable adjustments in response were considered or actioned. This is a significant failing.
It would have been appropriate for the landlord to have completed temporary repairs at an early stage to prevent ongoing water damage to the property. If this was not possible, it should have considered whether the resident needed to be decanted. Had the landlord acted in accordance with its repair obligations and remedied the leak from the above flat within a reasonable timescale or taken steps to “make safe” by carrying out temporary repairs, the ongoing damage caused to the resident’s property may have been prevented.
The landlord therefore missed opportunities to prevent significant distress and inconvenience being caused to the resident and her family. This amounts to maladministration.

The resident’s reports of damp and mould and subsequent request to decant.

This Service’s spotlight report on damp and mould states that landlords should ensure they have strategies in place to manage these types of cases with an emphasis on ensuring that the resident is kept informed. Also, for the resident to feel that the landlord is taking the issue seriously and that the matter is progressing.
The resident complained that as a result of the landlord’s delay to fix the leak this led to damp and mould forming. The resident said that damp and mould formed in the bathroom, kitchen, hall, living room and in both bedrooms. The resident reported that the family was extremely concerned about the effect the damp and mould had on their wellbeing, particularly as their eldest daughter was vulnerable due to having a compromised immunity. The resident also said that as a consequence of the damp being substantial in one of the bedrooms, the living room had to be used as a bedroom.
In this case, the landlord completed its repair work to stop the leak in the property on 1 December 2021. However, 18 January 2022 the resident’s representative contacted the landlord. At this time, the representative raised concerns about the level of damp and mould in the property and asked that the landlord complete required repairs and, if the timescale or extent of work required, for the family to be decanted.

The records show that three months after the resident reported damp and mould in the property on the landlord completed an inspection of the resident’s property on 21 April 2022. The inspection identified that the landlord needed to redecorate the bathroom, kitchen, hallway, and toilet, and to apply mould treatment to the living room and both bedrooms. During the inspection, the resident advised the landlord that works could not take place all day due to her disabled child’s needs. The landlord agreed to only work half days or in time frames agreed by the resident. The landlord also provided reassurance that the damp and mould treatment would not be toxic. The same day the landlord raised a repair order to complete the redecoration and to apply mould treatment. The landlord’s records state that it scheduled to complete decoration and damp work between the 26 and 27 May 2022.
The records show that landlord completed damp proofing works and plastering in the property on 16 June 2022, and this left the redecoration works in the property to be completed. However, evidence from the resident shows that repairs works to the children’s bedroom remain outstanding and only wash and mould treatments of the walls have been completed, not damp proofing.
In terms of what this Service would expect, guidance is clear that landlord’s are obliged to complete repairs within a reasonable timeframe. The landlord own repair policy states that it will complete routine repairs within 20 working days. In this case, there was periods of inactivity on the landlord’s part from 18 January 2022 and 26 May 2022. The landlord has not provided any reason for its inactivity at this time. Further, the records show that overall that it took the landlord four months to carry out wash and treatment of walls, however damp proofing remains outstanding and the children’s bedroom still remains in disrepair. Overall, this is not in line with the landlord’s own repair policy as work was not completed within 20 days.
The work was paused for six weeks from 26 June 2022 as the resident’s eldest child was having an operation and needed a period of six weeks for rehabilitation. It was therefore reasonable for the landlord to agree to pause work during this time.
The landlord visited the resident on 25 August 2022, but the resident was not available. The following day the landlord contacted the resident who confirmed the family were on holiday. As such the landlord was proactive in contacting the resident to arrange for redecoration works to commence.

Additionally, a four-month inactivity on the landlord’s part led to a missed opportunity to address the issue of damp and mould in the property. Particularly, given the resident’s eldest child was vulnerable and has been clear throughout her contact with the landlord that the damp and mould may exacerbate her physical health conditions.

The landlord’s guidance on decanting resident’s states that a decant can be offered if major or improvement works are required, redevelopment as part of a regeneration, demolition, sale of a property, and for emergency repairs following a fire and floor. The landlord’s decant charter states that a decant is always offered as a last resort. The charter goes on to state when the landlord is making the decision to decant it will only be carried out when all other practical and safe options to keep the customer in their home is exhausted.
This Service has not found any evidence that the landlord considered the resident’s request for a decant which it would have been reasonable for it to consider given the resident’s child’s reported vulnerabilities. The records show that the resident outlined in detail to the landlord the impact the damp and mould was having on the family. With this in mind, this Service has not seen any evidence that the landlord assessed the level of risk to the resident or the household. This included that the landlord did not assess the risk due to the delay in completing work and failed to respond to the residents request for a decant. Additionally, the landlord failed to actively listen to the residents concern and take a customer centric approach which left the resident feeling frustrated and distressed. Taking this into account, the landlord’s actions were not appropriate.
The landlord did, however, take into account that work could not be carried out on a full-time basis. The records show that the landlord gave due consideration to the resident’s concerns and arranged for work to take place for only half a day. This demonstrates that the landlord was able to make appropriate adjustments but failed to do so earlier on in the matter and missed opportunities to do this.
Whilst this Service notes that the landlord listened to the residents wishes and paused work due to the resident’s child’s operation, on balance, there was a significant delay to commence works and given the known vulnerabilities in the household, the landlord should have considered decanting the family at that time. The landlord failed to be proactive in communicating with the resident to obtain access and there was a lack of evidence to suggest that the landlord assessed any risk of additional support or priority to the work based on the resident’s vulnerability.

The landlord has acknowledged its failings in its stage two response. The landlord apologised for any delays and inconvenience caused. The landlord’s offer of £650 compensation goes some way to acknowledge the delays, time and trouble and distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident. However, it is this Service’s opinion that additional compensation is warranted in view of the impact on the resident. This includes the inconvenience caused by the landlord’s failure to initially consider temporary repairs and overall, the delay in the landlord completing damp and mould treatment and decoration works and lack of consideration to decant the resident. Therefore, this Service has ordered further compensation and service improvements.

The associated complaint.

The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) was introduced with the aim of improving complaint handling across the housing sector. As a member of the Scheme, the landlord is obliged to establish and maintain a complaints procedure in accordance with any good practice recommended by the Ombudsman.
The resident initially complained to the landlord on 10 October 2021, regarding an ongoing leak in the property and that the delay in repair work led to the property having damp and mould in most rooms. The landlord acknowledged the complaint within 24 hours on 11 October 2021. The landlord contacted the resident on 22 October 2021 to apologise for delay in providing its stage one response. The landlord said it would provide its response in the next ten days. At this time, the landlord did not provide a reason for the delay.
19 days after the raised her complaint, the landlord provided its stage one response on 29 October 2021. This is not in line with the landlord’s own complaint policy to provide a response within 10 working days.

The resident requested that the landlord escalate the complaint to stage two on 18 February 2022. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s stage two request on 22 February 2022 and confirmed it would provide its response within 20 working days. On 23 March 2022, the landlord apologised to the resident for the delay in providing its stage two complaint response. The landlord said it was still investigating the complaint and had to extend its response time due to this. The landlord said it wanted to complete an inspection of the property prior to providing its response.

The landlord contacted the resident on 15 May 2022 to apologise again for its delay in provided its stage two response. The landlord said it was awaiting information from its repair contractors. The landlord did not provide a timescale for providing its stage two response. Five days later the landlord called the resident to say it was going to uphold the complaint and would be providing compensation. The landlord assured the resident it would complete any outstanding repairs as soon as possible.
The landlord provided its response on 24 June 2022, 4 months after the resident requested that the landlord escalate their complaint to stage two of its process.
Overall, a four-month delay in providing its stage two response was unreasonable. This is not in line with the Code which states stage two responses should be provided within 20 working days, nor was it in line with the landlord’s own complaint policy. It is understandable that a delay of this length would have caused distress and inconvenience to the resident.
This Service understands that the delay in providing a response was due to the landlord waiting for updates on outstanding repair work. This would have caused frustration for the resident, as well as time and trouble chasing it up. It also led to a missed opportunity for the resident to access this Service as she was in the complaint process for a prolonged period of time without obtaining a final resolution. . This is not reasonable as the landlord should seek to obtain a resolution as soon as possible within agreed timescales and actions.
In the landlord’s stage one and two response it apologised for the delay in providing its initial complaint response. In its stage two response the landlord offered the resident £150 to cover poor complaint handling. With this in mind, this Service has considered whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right. In this case, the landlord has apologised and has offered financial compensation of £150. Whilst this is in line with the level of compensation this Service would order overall, the landlord did not go far enough to put things right based on the evidence this Service has considered. This is due to the fact that the repair work remained outstanding up until when it issued its stage two response and there was no definite plan made of when work would be completed. Therefore, this Service has not seen any evidence that the landlord has learnt from its failings.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s reports of a leak in the property.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould forming and request to decant.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure by the landlord for its handling of the resident’s associated complaint.

Reasons

The landlord failed to complete internal work to resolve the leak in a timely way. This led to a four-month delay which led to missed opportunities to prevent unreasonable time and trouble and inconvenience to the resident. The leak caused substantial mould and damp around the home which has still not resolved two years on.
The landlord did not handle the resident’s reports of damp and mould in a timely way. There was a four-month delay in the landlord damp and mould proofing some of the property while other parts are still outstanding. There was also a missed opportunity for the landlord to consider whether it was appropriate to decant the resident and her family during the delay. Further, the landlord did not complete decoration works in a timely way and the repair work still remains outstanding.
There was a delay in the landlord issuing its stage one complaint response and there was a significant delay in the landlord issuing its stage two complaint responses. This was not reasonable and not in line with what this Service would expect and not in line with the landlord’s own complaint policy.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within four weeks of the date of the report the landlord will:
1. Apologise to the resident for failings identified in this report.
2. Pay the resident the sum of £2,400 inclusive of:
  1. £900 which the landlord offered between its stage one and two complaint response if not already paid.
  2. £750 for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by the landlord’s action in response to the resident’s reports of a leak.
  3. £750 for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident and taking into account that the landlord did not assess the risk to the household caused by the delays.
1. The landlord should contact the resident to discuss any outstanding repair and decorative work and make an action plan for when outstanding work will be completed.

The landlord should provide the Ombudsman with evidence of compliance with the above orders.

Recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the landlord take the following action:
1. The landlord should review its repairs and decant policy to identify points of learning based on this case to prevent similar situations occurring in the future.
2. Consider whether it can action some of the recommendations in this Service’s damp and mould Spotlight report including the development of a damp and mould policy or framework.
3. The landlord should review its complaint handling failures in this case to identify points of learning to prevent similar situations occurring in the future.