Newlon Housing Trust (202210777)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202210777

Newlon Housing Trust

13 June 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:
1. Response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould
2. Response to the resident’s reports of repairs.
3. Complaint handling.
4. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s record keeping.

Background and summary of events

The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The property is a three bedroom ground and basement floor flat. The tenancy began on 22 March 2021. The landlord has no recorded vulnerabilities for the resident.
The landlord’s repairs policy explains its obligation to keep in good repair the structure and exterior of the property. This includes the drains, roof, internal windows, floors, back and front doors, door frames, skirting boards and pathways.
The repairs policy confirms non-urgent work as gutters, repairs to door, window frames and floors, to walls or ceilings and mechanical extractor fan in bathrooms or kitchens without windows. It set its non-emergency timeframe as 20 working days.
The landlord’s repairs policy also explains that some repair work may be long term and it will aim to complete such work within three months. It says long term work includes rising damp works.
The landlord has a responsibility under Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS), introduced by The Housing Act 2004, to assess hazards and risks within its rented properties. Damp and mould growth are a potential hazard and therefore the landlord is required to consider whether any mould problems in its properties amounts to a hazard that may require remedy. Landlords should be aware of their obligations under HHRS and they are expected to carry out additional monitoring of a property where potential hazards are identified.
The landlord’s compensation policy explains that where there is a delay in repairs a weekly payment of £10-25 compensation should be payable. It says the level of compensation depends on the severity of the impact to the resident and that the amount is payable by its contractor.
The Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould (published October 2021) provides recommendations for landlords, including that they should:
1. Adopt a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould interventions. Landlords should review their current strategy and consider whether their approach will achieve this.
2. Ensure they can identify complex cases at an early stage and have a strategy for keeping residents informed and effective resolution.
3. Ensure that they clearly and regularly communicate with their residents regarding actions taken or otherwise to resolve reports of damp and mould.
4. Identify where an independent, mutually agreed and suitably qualified surveyor should be used, share the outcomes of all surveys and inspections with residents to help them understand the findings and be clear on next steps. Landlords should then act on accepted survey recommendations in a timely manner.
The landlord has a two stage complaints process as detailed in its complaints policy. It says it follows the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code.
The landlord’s complaints procedure explains that it will respond to a stage one complaint within 10 working days and if this is not possible, an explanation and a date by when the stage one response should be given. It says that this should not be exceed a further 10 days without good reason. The procedure says a stage two complaint should be responded to within 20 working days.

Summary of events

Within its stage one response the landlord has accepted there was a history of repairs at the property since the resident moved into it in March 2021. However it has not provided evidence to show what these repairs related to. Within the resident’s complaint from January 2022 she has said she complained about mould in November 2021. This timeframe has not been disputed and has been accepted as when the resident first reported mould at the property.
On 9 December 2021 the resident told the landlord of recurring mould in the living room and around a bedroom window for her one and three year old daughters room. She told the landlord that she had been at the property since the beginning of the year and the number of issues at the property had a serious impact on her mental health. She said she wanted the landlord to assess the property, the problems it had and to fix them. The resident sent the landlord pictures of the property.
The landlord responded the same day and asked the resident a number of questions about the property which included whether it had vents, if there were leaks, what was above the ceiling and if the rooms impacted by damp were close together. It said once it had the response from the resident it would send this to its surveyor.
The resident responded on 10 December 2021 and said the rooms had vents but needed updating, she was not aware of any leaks, another tenant lived at the property above and the rooms affected were a few meters apart in her property. The landlord passed this information to its surveyor.
The resident raised her initial complaint on 7 January 2022. She said:
1. Since she moved into the property in March 2021 there were a number of problems with it. She said the issues had a serious impact on her mental health.
2. She was surprised at how the property was signed off as acceptable after void works.
3. Two walls in the bathroom were constantly damp.
4. Mould was growing on her living room floor, on her bed, clothes, bedroom windows and living room windows.
5. The property was accepted under false pretence as the landlord told her there was no damp and mould problem. She said she complained about mould previously but nothing had been done.
6. The bathroom floor needed to be lifted and replaced.
7. There was a gap problem with the garden door which made the downstairs difficult to heat.
8. The garden was left in a “disgusting” state by the landlord incurring costs for the resident in having items removed. She said she was concerned about Japanese knotweed in the garden.
9. She told the landlord of the problems with the toilet when she first moved in and the further issues with dirt on the door frames and rotting skirting boards.
10. She asked the landlord to complete a survey to assess the property and all the problems.
The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 10 January 2022 and said a survey had been scheduled for 13 January 2022.
On 20 January 2022 the landlord told the resident that it was still investigating her complaint and would respond within a further 10 working days. It apologised for the delay.
The landlord issued its stage one response on 4 February 2022. It said:
1. It could see a history of repairs since the resident moved into the property and apologised for the resident’s experiences.
2. The surveyor attended the property the previous month and it was awaiting an update on the concerns raised about damp, mould and Japanese knotweed. It said it would update the resident within the next seven working days to discuss the progress of the matter.
3. It thanked the resident for raising the issues and apologised for its delayed response to her complaint. It said it would take the matter to its voids team and would look to learn from the issues.
The landlord asked its surveyor for an update on 4 February 2022 and made the surveyor aware of the further issues raised by the resident.
On 7 February 2022 the landlord told the resident that:
1. Its surveyor was attempting to obtain a quote for the damp and mould issues and to investigate a possible leak.
2. Its surveyor had said it was not aware of the other issues raised in the resident’s complaint and would need to re-attend the property to inspect the issues not previously addressed. It asked if 24 February 2022 was a suitable time for it to re-attend.
3. It listed the issues it asked the surveyor to look at and told the resident to ensure they were looked into at the inspection.
4. It also said it was awaiting a response from its voids team on the issues that were not rectified with voids work prior to her moving in. It said it would provide feedback to the resident.
On 7 March 2022 the resident told the landlord about the ongoing issues and the landlord confirmed the work its surveyor reported as:
1. Renew rear UPVC door.
2. Carry out damp survey.
3. Install of vent covers to living room and bedroom windows.
4. Reboard ceiling storage.
5. Clear gutters at rear of property.
6. New extractor fan to kitchen.
As the resident was reporting ongoing issues, on 13 March 2022 the landlord said it was best for the surveyor and its contractor to reattend on 24 March 2022.
The resident requested an update on 7 April 2022 following the surveyor’s inspection and asked for dates when work would take place. The landlord responded the same day and apologised for the delay explaining it was short staffed. It said it would chase the surveyor to find out when he would raise the required work and would update the resident. The landlord confirmed the surveyors advice as:
1. The gutters to the rear needed checking.
2. Locate mains burst. The landlord said this task was with its contractor and it would chase this and look to renew the front pathway.
3. Rear door and frame to be renewed in UPVC part glazed.
4. Front door frame to splice and light latch fitted.
On 16 May 2022 the resident escalated her complaint. She said:
1. A surveyor attended her property twice and confirmed issues that needed to be addressed. She said she had booked an appointment for the damp issue in June 2022, but was yet to hear about the other issues.
2. She said she reported further repairs on 16 May 2022 and told the landlord about these new issues.
3. She had been living at the property for 14 months and could not decorate due to the state of the property. She said this was impacting her mental health.
4. The landlord had not been quick to give her a clear indication of how and when the repairs would take place. She said she would like a plan of how and when the problems would be addressed and said she felt her concerns were not being taken seriously.
5. She had four young children and that half the property was cold in the winter even with the heating on.
The landlord raised the following work on 18 May 2022:
1. rear and front door repair.
2. extractor fan repair and new fan to kitchen.
3. Installation of vent covers to living and bedroom vents.
4. Reboard ceiling to storage.
On 19 May 2022 the landlord apologised to the resident for the surveyor not adequately communicating when the works orders would be raised to reflect the inspection carried out. It said:
1. It had escalated the matter with its surveyor and said the necessary works orders had been urgently raised. It provided further detail about the specific jobs:
  1. For the gutters to the rear. It said a roofing inspection would be carried out and confirmed the contractor details. It also said the gutters would be cleared
  2. For the door it confirmed the contractor that would complete the work and the references.
  3. A damp inspection was scheduled for 23 June 2022.
  4. Vent cover works had been raised and provided the reference number for these.
  5. It said re-board to ceilings storage area had been raised and a new extractor fan would be fitted to the kitchen.
2. The landlord said it hoped its update clarified matters and asked if the resident would reconsider her complaint to remain at stage one of its process. It said it would assist to monitor repairs and keep the resident updated. It also explained that it would respect the resident’s decision to proceed to stage two of its complaints process.
On 19 May 2022 the landlord told its contractor to ensure that the rear gutters at the property were cleared and asked it to contact the resident to manage expectations.
On 24 May 2022 the landlord asked the resident if she still wanted to escalate her complaint to stage two of its complaints process. The resident responded on 29 May 2022 and said she did. The landlord said it would respond by no later than 14 June 2022.
On 14 June 2022 the landlord asked its contractor to provide it with an update on the roof inspection and gutter clean. On the same day it was told the contractor would attempt to attend on 17 June 2022 for the works.
The landlord issued its stage two response on 14 June 2022. It said:
1. It understood that in resolution of the complaint the resident wanted all repairs to be completed as soon as possible and for it to identify any service failings.
2. It provided an update on the work that formed part of the resident’s complaint and said:
  1. For the door. Its contractor had been unable to contact the resident and it asked the resident to confirm the contact details it held to allow it to proceed.
  2. The vent covers work had been scheduled for 15 June 2022.
  3. The re-boarding of the ceiling storage was scheduled for 15 June 2022.
  4. The extractor fan for the kitchen was scheduled for 17 June 2022.
  5. It was working with its contractor to locate the mains burst. It said it would follow up on this and test the incoming main, central heating and hot water system.
  6. In relation to clearing gutters, it said it could not see any arrangements had been made for this and said it would provide an update by 17 June 2022.
  7. For the roof inspection, it said the contractor had arranged appointments directly with the resident for this and asked the resident to let it know if she had not been contacted. The landlord said it would be in contact on 20 June 2022 to confirm attendance and provide an update.
3. The landlord said the following items from the resident’s complaint had not been addressed, but had been discussed with its surveyor:
  1. Japanese knotweed. It said the surveyor did not pick this up on the visit. However it asked the resident to submit picture if it was still an issue and said it would arrange for its estate team to remove.
  2. Skirting board replacement. It said its contractor should pick this up and asked the resident to let it know if it was not included in the site visit.
  3. Bathroom flooring. It said a repair was raised in July 2021 and completed in November 2021. It asked the resident to let it know if this was incorrect.
4. The landlord apologised for the length of time taken to identify and to complete the repairs. It also apologised for the lack of communication which led the resident to chase it for updates. The landlord said this fell below the service standards it aimed to uphold.
5. It said that whilst the stage one response provided feedback to its voids team to ensure properties were in the best condition before being made available to let. It said the case would be used in an attempt to ensure the same issue was not repeated.
6. The landlord also said it would feedback the lack of communication about appointment scheduling and delays to its contractor.
7. It accepted its repairs were out of the 20 working day target for completion.
8. It offered the resident £505 compensation in total and said £455 was in recognition of the delay with repair completion and said it would review this if there were further delays. It said the remaining £50 was in recognition of its lack of communication throughout the repairs process.
Following this the resident and landlord were in communication about outstanding work.
On 1 July 2022 the landlord provided an update to the resident, it said:
1. The roof was attended to on 27 June 2022 and it was awaiting a report from its contractor.
2. For the door, it said it was awaiting confirmation on this and said its contractor would compensate for the delay.
3. It said the extractor fan would be followed up and re-attended to.
4. It said £395 would be paid to the resident’s account, that was in arrears at that time.
5. It said an amount would come from its contractor and a final compensation figure would be calculated once all repairs were completed.
The evidence shows the landlord followed up on the outstanding repairs on 11 July 2022 and roof work was completed on 9 August 2022.
On 21 August 2022 the resident contacted this Service and said:
1. The bathroom floor was replaced.
2. A window lock had been fixed.
3. An extractor fan was fitted into the property.
4. She should be moved to a suitable property.
On 2 September 2022 the contractor asked the landlord to approve the work to the doors as it exceeded its authorisation limit. This was approved on 23 September 2022 and the work was completed on 15 November 2022.
On 11 October 2022 the resident told the landlord of the ongoing damp and mould issues in the bathroom. She also told it that vents to the living and bedroom had not been fitted. Its internal email said its surveyor was previously meant to visit but this did not happen, it arranged for the surveyor to attend again.
On 17 October 2022 the landlord’s contractor told it that it had not received instructions for the living room and bedroom vent covers. It asked for this to be raised so that it could attend and quote for the work.
On 18 October 2022 following the surveyor’s attendance at the property, the landlord’s notes say:
1. Potential leak under floor as the bathroom floor appeared wet with damp readings.
2. The damp patch on party wall and beside cupboard in bathroom has been reported since she moved into the property.
3. Repair leak found to radiator valve in children’s bedroom. It said repair had been raised with its contractor.
4. A specialist would investigate the leak as it assumed it was from radiator pipe running below floor.
On 20 October 2022 the landlord told this Service that:
1. It was awaiting resolution to the damp and mould issue.
2. It was awaiting confirmation of contractors attendance for the door repairs.
3. It was awaiting a response from the resident on Japanese knotweed.
4. The roof inspection was completed in August 2022.
5. Vent covers, re-boarding and the new extractor fan had been completed.
Following the landlord’s stage two response from 14 June 2022 it is understood that some repairs remained unresolved and the resident raised further complaints about her unhappiness with the property, some of these concerns were about new issues. It is important to explain that it is the Ombudsman’s role to investigate complaints brought to it that have exhausted a landlord’s internal complaints process. This investigation report therefore concerns the matters which were the subject of the resident’s formal complaint and which were subject of the landlord’s final response dated 14 June 2022. Where the same issues were ongoing they have been referred to below.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports damp and mould

Within its stage one response the landlord accepts the resident raised repairs since she moved into the property in March 2021. However this Service has only seen evidence from December 2021 onwards and as such has been unable to establish what repairs were raised prior to December 2021. When considering the landlord’s failure to provide requested evidence the Ombudsman has drawn inferences where it is reasonable to do so in the circumstances. The landlord’s record keeping for events before December 2021 will be addressed later within this report.
The key repairs that were reported by the resident from December 2021 were:
1. Damp and mould issues and replacement of bathroom floor.
2. Issues with the rear door.
3. Japanese knotweed in the garden.
Whilst the evidence shows the resident reported damp and mould concerns on 9 December 2021 and provided the landlord with pictures, it is noted that within this email she told the landlord about reoccurring mould and said “as stated before” she wanted the landlord to send someone to assess the entire property. Within her complaint from 7 January 2022 the resident said she made a complaint about mould in November and since then nothing had been done. As such, without evidence to the contrary it would be reasonable to conclude that the resident reported mould in November 2021.
In addition to this, within her complaint from 7 January 2022 the resident reported the worsening condition of the property and said two walls in the bathroom were constantly damp and that mould was growing on her living room wall, bed, clothes and windows in the living room and bedrooms. She said the constant problems at the property had caused her anxiety and depression and that she lived with young children.
It is noted that the landlord’s surveyor attended the property on 13 January 2022 and on 7 March 2022 it said a damp survey was needed and it would complete some work to vents at the property. The landlord raised orders for the vents on 18 May 2022 and the resident booked a damp survey for 23 June 2022.
There is no evidence to show the damp survey scheduled for June 2022 went ahead or that a revised damp survey was arranged at that time. Instead, the resident had to report the damp and mould issue again on 11 October 2022.
However, following this further report, a damp survey was completed on 18 October 2022. Here it found a potential leak under the bathroom floor, a leak to a radiator valve and said further investigation was needed. In its contact with this Service on 20 October 2022 it said it was awaiting resolution to the damp and mould issue and has not provided any further update.
Under the terms of the tenancy agreement the landlord is responsible for the repair of the structure and exterior of the property. This includes drains, gutters, external pipes, internal walls, floors, doors and skirting boards.
It is acknowledged that the landlord took some steps by initially asking its surveyor to inspect the property, arranging for some works to take place to help with the issues and arranging for a damp survey to be completed. However it failed to identify the cause of damp within a reasonable time and it took almost a year to complete a damp survey. This was not appropriate.
It is noted that when the resident raised concerns and provided the landlord with pictures of the property and followings its surveyors inspection of the property, the landlord did not dispute that there was damp and mould. However despite its obligations under HHSRS, it failed to implement any ongoing monitoring to address the problem.
The landlord also failed to comply with the following recommendation set out in the Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould from October 2021 as:
1. It did not identify the complex case at an early stage.
2. It did not regularly communicate with the resident about actions taken or otherwise to resolve the reports of damp and mould.
3. It did not act on accepted survey recommendations in a timely manner.
It is not disputed that the bathroom floor was replaced in November 2021 this was at the same time the resident said she complained about damp, including wet walls in the bathroom. Whilst this Service has not been provided with any evidence relating to this repair, in light of the findings of the damp survey in October 2022 that there was a potential leak under the bathroom floor, it is reasonable to conclude that the issue may have been present in November 2021 and the landlord failed to investigate the wet walls or identify the cause at that time. This was not appropriate.
Overall the landlord’s response to reports of damp and mould amount to severe maladministration. It took the landlord almost a year to investigate and identify the cause of damp and mould at the property. It failed to do this at an early time, it did not regularly communicate the actions it was taking to resolve the issues and has not provided evidence to show it acted on the damp survey recommendation in a timely manner or that the issue has since been resolved.
During this time it was aware that the resident lived at the property with her four young children and she continued to tell it of the worsening condition of the property due to the damp and mould and how it had affected her bathroom, living room and two bedrooms. The resident told it how she felt she could not decorate the property and how this combined with the repairs was causing her anxiety and depression. This was understandably a worrying time for the resident which was exacerbated by the landlord’s failure to act in a timely manner to identify the cause and act, leaving the resident feeling her concerns were not being taken seriously.
When deciding an appropriate remedy the above has been taken into account and rental compensation of 30% would be appropriate in the circumstances. As the landlord took almost a year to identify the cause of damp and mould, 50 weeks is an appropriate timeframe. Therefore 30% of £153 rent per week amounts to £45.90. This multiplied by 50 amounts to £2,295 rental compensation in total. The Ombudsman has made a further order for compensation in light of the distress and inconvenience caused.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of repairs

In relation to the reports of repair to the door. The evidence shows this was reported to the landlord on 7 January 2022. Its surveyor attended the property on 24 February and on 7 March 2022 it told the resident that it would renew the door. However, it did not provide a timeframe for this repair work. This meant the resident had to continue to chase it for updates and it was following her complaint escalation that it raised a works order on 18 May 2022. By this time the landlord had already exceeded the non-emergency timeframe of 20 working days set in its repairs policy. This was not appropriate
It is acknowledged that following the repair order its contractor reported some difficulty in contacting the resident in June and July 2022. However, regardless of this difficulty the evidence shows that in September 2022 there was a further delay due to the need to approve the work order and the repair was not completed until 15 November 2022. This was 40 weeks over the timeframe it set for non-emergency works and was not appropriate.
The landlord told the resident that its surveyor did not assess the situation with the Japanese knotweed and on 14 June 2022 it asked the resident to provide pictures of this if it was still an issue. However there is no evidence to show the resident provided picture or told it this remained an issue. It was appropriate for the landlord to ask for pictures and confirmation if the issue still persisted without any further evidence, it was reasonable for it to have not taken any further action.
Overall the landlord’s handling of the rear door repair was not appropriate. It exceeded its non-emergency works timeframe by 40 weeks for repairs. Throughout the repairs process it did not appropriately monitor the repair or keep the resident updated with timeframes for completion especially once it had exceeded the timeframe set in its repairs policy.
However, within its stage two response it appropriately acknowledged its delay in handling the repair and its lack of communication. It attempted to put things right in its offer of compensation for £505. This amount has been considered alongside its compensation policy and the impact of its failings, when doing so the landlord’s compensation here was proportionate to its failing and the impact that its actions had on the resident. It has offered redress to the resident which resolves the complaint satisfactory.

The landlord’s complaint handling

The resident raised her complaint on 7 January 2022 and the landlord appropriately acknowledged it on 10 January 2022. On 20 January 2022, 9 working days after the resident’s stage one complaint, the landlord told her it was still investigating her complaint and would respond within a further 10 working days. It is noted that the stage one response was not issued until 4 February 2022, 11 working days after its holding letter.
It is noted that when the resident escalated her complaint on 16 May 2022, the landlord attempted to resolve the complaint with its response from 19 May 2022 explaining that it had escalated the matter to its surveyor and provided an update on the work that formed part of the complaint. Here the landlord asked the resident if she still wished to escalate her complaint despite her previous request.
Whilst the landlord’s response from 19 May 2022 was resolution focused, it is good practice for a landlord to treat an escalated complaint request as a trigger for its stage two process and adding an additional stage can, at times, add confusion. In light of its attempts to resolve the issue here, the approach adopted by the landlord would have had minimal impact, if any, on the resident. However, the landlord should be mindful that such an approach could cause problems.
It is acknowledged that once the resident confirmed she wanted to move to stage two of its complaints process the landlord issued it stage two response within 16 working days. This timeframe was appropriate.
Overall, whilst the landlord did exceed its stage one response timeframe by a day, this would not have had a significant impact on the resident especially as it did attempt to keep the resident reasonably updated throughout its complaints process. As such there was no maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

The landlord’s record keeping

Paragraph 10 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme confirm the Ombudsman’s expectation in relation to the provision of information, it says:
1. The landlord must provide copies of any information requested by the Ombudsman, that is, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, relevant to the complaint. This may include the following records and documents:
  1. Any internal files, documents correspondence, records, accounts or minutes of meetings in hard copy or electronic form.
As part of this Service’s investigation copies of survey’s, inspection reports and records relating to repairs raised and completed by the landlord prior to December 2021 were requested on 28 September 2022 and again in May 2023.
The landlord has not provided this information despite it referring to repairs raised and completed between 22 March 2021 and December 2021 within its complaint responses. In May 2023 the landlord said that “all correspondence with the resident, contractors and department was via email and included dates and outcomes of surveyor inspections”. However this does not explain why it has been unable to provide repair information for prior to December 2021.
It has also not provided any further information on the damp and mould issues that it confirmed were outstanding in October 2022. This is despite this Service requesting an update on the current situation.
A landlord should have systems in place to maintain accurate records of repair reports, responses, inspections and investigations. Good record keeping is important to evidence the actions a landlord and its contractor have taken. A failure to keep adequate records indicates the landlord’s repairs processes are not operating effectively. The landlord should be aware of repair works raised and completed by it and its contractors. Its staff should be aware of its record management policy and procedures and should adhere to these.
Overall, the landlord has not provided this Service with the information mentioned above. It has failed to provide details of repairs that were raised by the resident following her moving into the property in March 2021. This is despite it saying it could see a history of repairs since the resident moved into the property within its stage one response from February 2022. The landlord has failed to explain why it does not have this information. As such there was a maladministration in the landlord’s record keeping.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was reasonable redress in the level of compensation offered by the landlord in relation the repair.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was no maladministration in relation to the landlord’s complaint handling.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration with the landlord’s record keeping.

Reasons

There was severe maladministration in the landlord’s response to reports of damp and mould at the property. It took the landlord almost a year to investigate and identify the cause of damp and mould and it has not provided information to show the issue has since been resolved.
The landlord exceeded its non-emergency works timeframe by 40 weeks for repairs, it did not monitor the repair or keep the resident appropriately updated. However the landlord did appropriately acknowledge the delay and its lack of communication and its compensation offer of £505 was appropriate in the circumstances.
The landlord did exceed its stage one response timeframe by a day, however this would not have had a significant impact on the resident especially as it did keep her reasonably updated throughout its complaints process. As such she would not have been impacted by this delay. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.
The landlord has not provided appropriate records of repairs raised and completed prior to December 2021. This demonstrates the data and information needed to provide effective and efficient service is missing, incorrect or not used and that its record keeping is not operating effectively.

Orders

The Ombudsman orders the landlord to arrange for a senior member of its staff to apologise to the resident for the failings identified in this report, in person (or in writing if preferred by the resident) within four weeks of the date of this report.
The Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay the resident a total of £3,000 in compensation within four weeks of the date of this report. Compensation should be paid directly to the resident and not offset against any arrears:
1. £505 previously offered by the landlord if it has not already been paid.
2. £2,295 rental compensation to acknowledge the landlord’s failure to appropriately address the resident’s damp and mould concerns.
3. £200 for the distress, inconvenience, time and trouble caused by the highlighted failings relating to damp and mould.
The Ombudsman orders that within four weeks of the date of this report the landlord completes an inspection of the property to assess outstanding works. Within two weeks of this it is to confirm in writing to the resident and this Service:
1. The outstanding works in relation to damp and mould and provide target dates for these to be completed, if they have not been completed.
2. The measures it has put in place to monitor whether the proposed works remedy the damp and mould in the property.
The Ombudsman orders the landlord to consider the Ombudsman’s “Spotlight on: knowledge and information management” and within six weeks of this report it should share its learning with this Service with a focus on its systems and process for recording repairs.