Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing (MTV) (202400643)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202400643

Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing (MTV)

31 July 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:
   1. The resident’s reports of damp and mould.
   2. The resident’s request to be compensated for reported damage to decorations.
   3. The associated complaints.

Background

2. The property is a 2-bedroom, semi-detached house and the resident had an assured tenancy at the property which began in February 2021. The resident moved to an alternative property in February 2024.The landlord advised us that it had no vulnerability information listed for the resident or her family members at the tenancy sign-up. However, as part of the complaint the resident advised the landlord that her daughter had been diagnosed with Protracted Bacterial Bronchitis.
3. The landlord’s records state that the resident contacted the landlord on 25 September 2023 to report the presence of mould. The records state that she was asked to provide photos but did not provide these. The landlord’s records show that it logged the need for an inspection for damp and mould on 30 October 2023 following further contact from the resident.
4. The landlord inspected the property on 15 November 2023 and identified the need for various repairs, including resecuring the downpipe to the guttering and carrying out a mould wash to the bedroom windows and ceilings. The guttering and downpipe were repaired on 28 November 2023 and the mould wash was carried out on 13 December 2023.
5. The resident made a stage 1 complaint on 9 November 2023 in which she said the damp and mould issues had been ongoing for over a year and the landlord had only been out once. She said the landlord kept cancelling appointments and that the mould was affecting her daughters’ bedroom and had affected her daughter’s health. She explained that she had contacted the landlord about the mould in October 2023 and as a result an appointment had been booked for an Inspector to attend on 15 November 2023 (after the landlord had cancelled an earlier appointment booked for 8 November 2023).
6. The landlord sent its stage 1 reply on 27 November 2023 in which it stated the following:
   1. The resident had phoned the landlord on 25 September 2023 and had been asked to provide photos of the reported damp patches on the windows. However, she had not supplied the photos.
   2. The resident had then reported damp and mould on 30 October 2023 and had supplied the requested information. As a result, the landlord had arranged an inspection to take place on 8 November 2023. However, this had been changed to 15 November 2023 as the Surveyor had to attend a personal emergency.
   3. Following the inspection on 15 November 2023, the landlord had raised 4 repair orders and the works associated with these orders were scheduled to be completed between 1 and 12 December 2023.
   4. The landlord said that its Complaints team would only look at issues that occurred in the last 6 months. Therefore, as the resident had advised that the last mould treatment had been in February 2023, the landlord said it could only apologise the mould had returned.
   5. The landlord did not uphold the complaint.
7. The resident contacted the landlord on 5 March 2024 and asked for her complaint to be escalated to stage 2 because the damp and mould issue had not been resolved and the windows needed replacing. She asked to be reimbursed for the money she had spent on redecorations due to the mould returning. The landlord sent its stage 2 reply on 26 March 2024 in which it stated the following:
   1. The resident had asked for her complaint to be escalated because she said the mould had returned after she had decorated the whole of the upstairs.
   2. The landlord had inspected the property in November 2023 and had found localised mould growth to the bedroom window reveal and the corner of the ceiling.
   3. It had raised an order for a mould wash, which it had carried out within the correct timescale.
   4. The landlord said it had compared photos taken during the November 2023 inspection and photos taken when she vacated the property and found there was no material difference in the decorations.
   5. The landlord concluded that the stage 1 complaint had been handled correctly and did not uphold the stage 2 complaint.
8. The resident contacted us on 30 September 2024 and said the damp and mould had still been ongoing at the stage she moved out of the property in February 2024. She emphasised the impact the reported damp and mould had had on her daughters’ health.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

9. The resident stated in her stage 1 complaint dated 9 November 2023 that her daughter had developed asthma and bronchitis and the property condition had affected her daughter’s health. The resident also advised us on 30 September 2024 that her daughters had needed medical treatment because of the damp and mould. We are unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. This would be better dealt with as a claim through the courts. The resident may wish to consider taking independent advice if she wishes to pursue this option.
10. The landlord has provided several photographs, some of which it received from the resident. We are limited in the extent to which we can rely on photographic evidence as it is not possible for us to determine the location or circumstances of the photographs, or the validity of the images themselves. As a result, we do not generally place significant reliance on photographs in reaching our decisions.
11. The resident advised us on 30 September 2024 that the damp and mould issues had started in November 2022. We encourage residents to raise complaints with their landlords in a timely manner. This is because with the passage of time, evidence may be unavailable and personnel involved may have left an organisation, which makes it difficult for a thorough investigation to be carried out and for informed decisions to be made. Therefore, taking into account the availability and reliability of evidence, it is considered fair and reasonable for this assessment to focus on the landlord’s handling of events from September 2023 onwards. Any reference in this report to the events that occurred prior to September 2023 has been made to provide context.
12. A key part of our role is to assess the landlord’s response to a complaint and therefore it is important that the landlord has had an opportunity to consider all the information being investigated by us as part of its complaint response. It is therefore considered fair and reasonable to only investigate matters up to the date of the final response on 26 March 2024. Information following the landlord’s final complaint response has, however, been included in this report for context.

The resident’s reports of damp and mould

13. The landlord’s guide to repair responsibilities states:
    1. Residents must report repairs promptly and let the landlord know if they are worried about anything in their home.
    2. The landlord uses the following repair priority categories:
       1. Emergency – the contractor will attend within 24 hours.
       2. Routine (appointment) – every effort will be made to complete the repair within 20 working days of the resident contacting the landlord. However, at times, a Repair Officer may need an initial appointment to assess the repair further.
       3. Non-routine – the contractor will be given a 90-day period to carry out the repair where the repair is complex or materials are needed.
14. The landlord stated in its stage 1 reply that the resident reported damp and mould on 25 September 2023 and she was asked to provide photos showing the extent of the damp and mould. The landlord stated that the resident did not provide the photos. The resident disputed this in her stage 1 complaint dated 9 November 2023 and said she had sent photos to the landlord. In situations where there are conflicting accounts, we rely on documentary evidence to reach conclusions. In this instance, we have not seen any evidence that the landlord requested the photos nor that the resident submitted them. Therefore, with insufficient evidence, we are unable to establish whether they were requested or sent to the landlord.
15. The landlord’s records show that the resident reported the presence of damp and mould on 30 October 2023 and submitted photos to show the problem. As a result, the landlord booked an appointment for a Surveyor to carry out an inspection on 8 November 2023. The landlord had therefore booked the inspection to take place 7 working days after the resident had phoned on 30 October 2023. This was a reasonable timescale as it was within the landlord’s 20-working day target for non-emergency (routine) repairs.
16. The landlord’s repairs log shows that the appointment was rescheduled from 8 to 15 November 2023. The landlord advised the resident in its stage 1 reply that the appointment had been rescheduled because the Surveyor had to attend a personal emergency. Whilst we understand that emergencies may lead to the landlord having to change appointments, it was a shortcoming on the part of the landlord that it had not arranged for a different Surveyor to attend the appointment on 8 November 2023. Changing the appointment created frustration and inconvenience for the resident.
17. The inspection took place on 15 November 2023, which was 12 working days after the resident had contacted the landlord on 30 October 2023. Therefore, although the appointment had been changed, the inspection was still carried out within a reasonable timescale.
18. Following the inspection on 15 November 2023, the landlord raised a repair order on the same day to remake the joint between the guttering and the downpipe. The landlord had therefore raised this order in a timely manner after the inspection, which was reasonable. This work was completed on 28 November 2023, which was 9 working days after it was raised. The landlord had therefore carried out the repair within an appropriate timescale, which was in line with its policy target of 20 working days for routine jobs.
19. The landlord’s repairs log shows that it raised an order on 23 November 2023 to carry out a mould wash to the 2 bedrooms. It is unclear from the evidence seen why the landlord had not raised the order on 15 November 2023 when it had inspected the property. However, the mould wash was carried out on 13 December 2023, which was 20 working days after the inspection. Therefore, although the order to carry out the mould wash was not raised immediately after the inspection, the work was nevertheless carried out within a reasonable timescale.
20. In summary, the resident reported damp and mould on 30 October 2023. The landlord then inspected the property and carried out the works identified by the Surveyor within reasonable timescales. We have therefore found there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.

The resident’s request to be compensated for reported damage to decorations

21. The landlord’s Compensation Policy states: “[The landlord] will not consider compensation when…all statutory and contractual obligations have been fulfilled”.
22. Our role is not to decide whether the decorations were damaged due to mould. Our role is to consider how the landlord responded to the resident’s reports that the decorations were damaged and decide whether the landlord’s response was in line with its policy and was fair and reasonable.
23. The resident contacted the landlord on 5 March 2024 to request compensation for the money she had spent on decorations. She said the mould had returned and this had affected the decorations upstairs. The landlord phoned the resident on 7 March 2024 to request copies of receipts showing the cost of the decorations. It was reasonable that the landlord had requested receipts so that it could consider the resident’s request for compensation for the redecorations.
24. The landlord stated in its stage 2 reply dated 26 March 2024 that it had found no evidence that the decorations had been damaged. The landlord had compared internal photos of the property taken by the Surveyor during his inspection on 15 November 2023 with photos taken by the landlord in March 2024 after the resident had moved out. It said it found no evidence to support the resident’s reports that the decorations had been damaged by damp and mould. Our view is that the landlord had acted reasonably by investigating the resident’s complaint about damaged decorations and providing her with a timely response.
25. The evidence suggests that the landlord assumed in its stage 2 reply that the resident was saying the damage to her decorations had occurred after the Surveyor’s inspection on 15 November 2023. However, the resident has advised us that she had wallpapered over the affected areas on various occasions during the periods before and after the landlord’s inspection on 15 November 2023.
26. In terms of the reported damage that occurred prior to the landlord’s inspection on 15 November 2023, the resident did not report the damaged decorations to the landlord on 30 October 2023 nor as part of her stage 1 complaint on 9 November 2023. Had she done so, the landlord’s Surveyor could have inspected the decorations as part of his inspection on 15 November 2023 and decided whether it was appropriate to compensate her for the decorations. As the landlord was not told about the reported damage prior its inspection, our view is that it could not have reasonably known at the time of the inspection that the resident wanted to claim for damage to her decorations.
27. The landlord had concluded at both stages of the complaints process that it had acted correctly in responding to the resident’s reports of damp and mould. Therefore, its decision not to compensate the resident for the decorations was in line with its Compensation Policy as it had not identified any failings.
28. In summary, we have found that the landlord acted reasonably in considering the resident’s reports of damage to her decorations because:
    1. It investigated whether the decorations were damaged between the date of the Surveyor’s inspection on 15 November 2023 and the resident moving out in February 2024.
    2. The landlord advised the resident of its decision regarding her claim within a reasonable timescale.
    3. The resident did not advise the landlord she wanted to claim for damaged decorations prior to the Surveyor’s inspection on 15 November 2023. This meant the Surveyor was unaware of the need to inspect the decorations.
    4. As the landlord had not found any failings in its handling of the reported damp and mould, it acted in line with its Compensation Policy by deciding not to compensate the resident for the reported damage to decorations.
29. Based on our assessment, we have found there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request to be compensated for reported damage to decorations.

The associated complaints

30. The landlord operates a 2-stage complaints process. It will acknowledge the complaint within 5 working days of receipt and will reply to stage one complaints within 10 working days of the acknowledgement. The landlord will acknowledge the stage 2 complaint within 5 working days of receipt and provide a full response to the complaint within 20 working days. The policy states that if the landlord cannot respond within these timescales, it will agree an extension with the resident.
31. The resident made a stage 1 complaint on 9 November 2023 and the landlord acknowledged the complaint on 14 November 2023. The landlord therefore acknowledged the complaint appropriately within the 5-working day timescale stipulated in its Complaints Policy.
32. The landlord sent its stage 1 reply on 27 November 2023, which was 9 working days after acknowledging the complaint. The landlord had therefore responded within an appropriate timescale which was in line with its Complaints Policy.
33. The resident contacted the landlord on 5 March 2024 and asked for the complaint to be escalated to stage 2. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 7 March 2024, which was an appropriate timescale in line with its policy.
34. The landlord sent its stage 2 reply on 26 March 2024, which was 13 working days after acknowledging the complaint. The landlord had therefore responded within its policy timescale of 20 working days, which was appropriate.
35. In summary, the landlord responded to the stage 1 and 2 complaints within the appropriate timescales. Consequently, we have found there was no maladministration in its complaints handling.

Determination

36. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
37. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s request to be compensated for reported damage to decorations.
38. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the associated complaints.