Peabody Trust (202330653)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202330653

Peabody Trust

18 October 2024

 

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:
    1. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s report of a roof leak.
    2. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident holds an assured tenancy with the landlord. The tenancy began in October 2023. The property is a 2-bedroom flat on the 12th floor.
  2. The resident has stated that she has asthma, allergy to mould spores and mental health conditions, including bipolar disorder, anxiety and depression. The occupants of the property include the resident’s 7-year-old daughter.
  3. The resident first reported damp and mould in her property on 11 October 2023. The landlord arranged an inspection for 18 October 2023; however, this appointment was missed by the contractors.
  4. The resident reported damp and mould again, and a roof leak, on 1 November 2023. An appointment for the damp and mould was scheduled by the landlord for 13 November 2023 but this was cancelled and rescheduled for 30 November 2023. The landlord arranged an appointment for the roof leak to take place on 16 November 2023.
  5. The resident raised a formal complaint on 7 November 2023. The resident explained her dissatisfaction with the missed appointments in relation to the damp and mould and roof leak. The resident informed the landlord about her health conditions and sought an apology and compensation as a resolution to her complaint.
  6. The landlord issued a stage 1 response on 16 November 2023. The landlord acknowledged the missed damp and mould appointments and noted that this had been re-booked for 30 November 2023. The landlord acknowledged that this was a service failure as it was outside of its 28-day timeframe for responsive repairs. In relation to the roof leak, the landlord noted that operatives did attend on 16 November 2023 as scheduled, however, they were unable to gain access as there had been a failure to coordinate key access to the roof hatch. The appointment had been rescheduled to 28 November 2023. The landlord apologised for the failures and stated it would calculate compensation once the required works had been carried out and that it would monitor the repairs to completion.
  7. The resident raised concerns about 4 other outstanding repair issues on 16 November 2023. However, the landlord advised that it could only investigate the issues raised in the initial complaint and any additional matters would need to be raised as a new complaint. The landlord stated this may need to be raised with the voids team as the issues were in relation to the condition of the property when the resident moved in.
  8. Following the damp and mould inspection on 30 November 2023, the landlord’s contractor noted that there were no signs of damp and mould or a leak to the ceiling. The contractor provided photographs to the landlord to evidence this.
  9. On 4 December 2023, the resident emailed the landlord and informed it that there was still damp and mould in the property and the roof leak remained ongoing. The landlord stated that it raised a new job in relation to the leak and someone would be in touch with the resident. On 19 December 2023, the landlord informed the resident the damp and mould works would not be booked until the leak had been resolved as the property would need to dry out first.
  10. The resident continued to chase the repairs. On 10 January 2024, the landlord stated that it was chasing the contractors regarding the leak, and it had requested an appointment on 5 January 2024.
  11. The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 on 16 January 2024. The resident was unhappy with the lack of communication from the landlord’s contractors. She stated that the damp and mould was making herself and her daughter unwell.
  12. On 8 February 2024, the resident informed the landlord that the roofers had completed the job to repair the leak and queried when the damp and mould would be resolved. The landlord stated that the damp and mould works would not be arranged while there was an active leak and arranged for dehumidifiers to be sent to the resident’s property. The landlord contributed towards the cost of running the dehumidifiers.
  13. On 12 February 2024, the landlord informed the resident there was a delay in issuing a stage 2 response. A stage 2 response was issued by the landlord on 8 March 2024. The landlord apologised for the delay in arranging the damp and mould inspection but noted that no visible signs of damp and mould were found following the inspection. With regards to the roof leak, works were arranged to install overlay felt on top of the ash felt to make the area watertight and this was completed on 28 January 2024. The landlord acknowledged the delay was a service failure. The landlord also acknowledged that there was poor complaint handling due to the stage 2 response being delayed. The landlord offered a total of £415.13 compensation in recognition of the identified failures.
  14. On 26 March 2024, the resident informed the landlord that the damp and mould was still present, and the ceiling remained damaged from the leak.
  15. The resident referred her complaint to this Service on 21 May 2024. She explained that the damp and mould remained unresolved, and the leak had started again. She stated that she wanted the landlord to transfer her to a more suitable property closer to her support network and for it to increase its offer of compensation as a resolution to her complaint.
  16. The resident has since informed this Service that the damp and mould in the bedroom and living room has been resolved, however, it is still present on the flooring in her daughter’s bedroom. The resident stated that although the ceiling leak stopped for 6-8 weeks following the repair, it has now started again.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident mentioned that the damp and mould at the property has impacted both her and her daughter’s health. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s comments regarding their health, but this Service is unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. Matters of personal injury or damage to health, their investigation and compensation, are not part of the complaints process, and are more appropriately addressed by way of the courts or the landlord’s liability insurer as a personal injury claim. However, it is accepted that damp and mould can pose a significant risk to health. This Service can consider the general risk as well as any distress and inconvenience caused by any errors by the landlord and the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about her health.

Policies and procedures

  1. In accordance with the resident’s tenancy agreement, the landlord is responsible for keeping the structure and exterior of the property in repair. This includes:
    1. The roof.
    2. Internal walls, floors and ceilings, doors and door frames, door hinges and skirting boards but not internal painting and decoration.
  2. The landlord’s damp, mould and condensation policy states that it will investigate all reports of damp, mould and condensation within residents’ homes where it is responsible for repairs.
  3. The landlord’s responsive repairs policy states that non-urgent repairs are to be completed within 28 days with an average target of 10 working days. Programmed repair works which require additional time due to manufacture, complexity or specialist trade are to be completed within 60 calendar days with an average target of 33 days. This includes damp works. Emergency repairs are to be completed within 4 hours and made safe within 24 hours.

Reports of damp and mould

  1. 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. Damp and mould growth are a potential hazard and therefore the landlord is required to consider whether any mould problems in its properties amount to a hazard that may require remedy.
  2. The resident first reported damp and mould in her property on 11 October 2023. The appointment did not take place until 30 November 2023, following a missed appointment on 18 October 2023. This was approximately 51 days after the resident’s initial report. In accordance with the landlord’s responsive repairs policy, an inspection should have been carried out within 28 days. This was an unreasonable delay and therefore a service failure by the landlord.
  3. The resident raised a formal complaint about the matter due to her frustrations with the missed appointment and the lack of urgency in dealing with her concerns. The landlord appropriately acknowledged that there was a service failure with regards to the missed repair appointment and the delay in arranging an inspection. The landlord’s compensation and remedies policy states that it will pay £10 for each missed appointment when there has been a repair service failure. The landlord failed to adhere to its compensation policy as the resident was not offered compensation for the missed appointment. Although the landlord stated that it would calculate compensation once the works had been completed, given that this was an identified service failure and the landlord’s policy specified a set compensation amount for the failure, the landlord should have offered this to the resident. This was a missed opportunity by the landlord to put things right at the earliest opportunity.
  4. The inspection of the damp and mould took place on 30 November 2023. However, the contractor reported that there was no sign of damp and mould and provided a specification and photographs to the landlord. This Service has not been provided with a copy of the specification or the photographs taken by the contractor. The landlord was entitled to rely on the expertise of its contractors in assessing whether there was damp and mould present in the property.
  5. However, it is evident that the resident provided the landlord with photographs on 4 December 2023 following the inspection. The photographs provided by the resident indicate the presence of mould in the property, including under the flooring in her daughter’s bedroom. The resident had also informed the landlord that her daughter had not been sleeping in her bedroom due to the damp under the flooring. Given the evidence provided by the resident and the conflicting information provided by its contractor, the landlord should have been proactive in arranging a further inspection to get a second opinion.
  6. On 19 December 2023, the landlord informed the resident that the damp and mould works would not be booked until the leak had been resolved as the property had to dry out first. However, it is evident that the leak began in the property after the resident reported the damp and mould. As the damp and mould was not in the same location as the ceiling leak, it is unclear why the landlord associated the two together. Regardless of whether the leak was the cause of the damp and mould, the landlord could have still considered interim mitigating measures to alleviate the housing conditions the resident had complained of and it is unreasonable that there is no evidence to show that it did this.
  7. Furthermore, as the landlord did not carry out any diagnostic tests to identify the cause of the damp and mould, it could not have confirmed that the leak was the cause. The landlord was also aware of the health conditions the resident had and that there was a 7-year-old child living in the property who was not using her bedroom due to the damp. The landlord should have taken into consideration its responsibilities under the HHSRS and arranged for a prompt further inspection of the damp and mould and arranged for any recommended repair works to take place within an appropriate timescale. The landlord’s approach was not fair to the resident, as it meant that the damp and mould remained ongoing in the property while she awaited a repair to the leak (which was also subject to delays).This was a failure by the landlord.
  8. As the resident continued to report the damp and mould and the impact it was having on her and her daughter, the landlord arranged for 2 dehumidifiers to be sent to her property on 8 February 2024. The dehumidifiers were not sent to the resident’s property until 22 February 2024. This was approximately 135 days after the resident’s initial report of damp and mould. This was an unreasonable delay by the landlord in its attempt to mitigate the reported damp and mould in the resident’s property.
  9. Following the delivery of the dehumidifiers, the resident reported to the landlord that the contractor had left the pipes of the dehumidifier outside of the bucket to collect water. This resulted in there being water all over the resident’s living room floor. It is understandable that this would have caused frustration for the resident who was already experiencing other repair problems in her home. There is no evidence to show that the landlord responded to the resident’s concerns or followed up the incident with its contractor. It is the landlord’s responsibility to ensure that its contractors are appropriately skilled to carry out the tasks they are assigned to do. When a failure occurs, the landlord should ensure that it investigates the matter and takes appropriate learning from the incident to ensure it does not occur again. The landlord failed to take appropriate action in response to the resident’s concerns.
  10. When the landlord offered the dehumidifiers to the resident, it referenced an active kitchen window leak being the reason for the delay in the damp and mould works being carried out. While the kitchen window leak was not part of the resident’s complaint, or part of this investigation, it is notable that the reported damp and mould was in the bedrooms and living room.
  11. In its stage 2 response on 8 March 2024, the landlord reiterated that there were no visible signs of damp and mould following the inspection on 30 November 2023. There is no evidence to show that a further inspection was carried out between 30 November 2023 and 8 March 2024, after the resident continued to report damp and mould in her home. The landlord’s response was dismissive of the resident’s continued reports of damp and mould and the photographic evidence she had provided. This attitude from the landlord contributed to the overall delay in resolving the damp and mould and likely impacted the landlord and tenant relationship. Throughout the process, the resident grew more frustrated with the landlord due to the delays experienced and the unresolved issues.
  12. Overall, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property. The landlord failed to appropriately investigate the resident’s repeated reports and delayed taking appropriate and timely action. The landlord did not evaluate what mitigations it could put in place to support the resident. Given the vulnerabilities of the resident’s household, the landlord’s responses did not reflect the urgency of the issue.
  13. Where a landlord admits failings, the Ombudsman’s role is to assess whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. The Ombudsman also considers whether the landlord acted in line with our Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
  14. In its stage 2 response, the landlord acknowledged that it had failed to arrange a damp and mould inspection in accordance with the timescales in its repairs policy. The landlord awarded £300 for time, trouble and inconvenience; however, this was in conjunction with its handling of the roof the leak.
  15. The landlord’s offer of redress failed to fully recognise the detriment to the resident and her daughter due to the failings identified above. The offer did not account for the vulnerabilities present and the landlord failed to address the resident’s concerns about her daughter feeling unable to sleep in her bedroom due to the presence of damp. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident an additional £200 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the identified failings and £10 for the missed appointment.
  16. The resident has informed this Service that the landlord has since “painted” over the damp and mould in the living room and the resident’s bedroom. However, the landlord has not taken any action in the resident’s daughter’s bedroom. It is unclear whether the landlord has attempted to diagnose the cause of the damp and mould and it is therefore ordered to carry out a damp and mould survey and share the findings with the resident and this Service.

Reports of a roof leak

  1. The resident first reported a roof leak on 1 November 2023. The landlord appropriately arranged for a repair appointment to take place on 16 November 2023. However, the contractors attended without a key to the roof hatch and therefore were unable to complete any repairs. When the landlord became aware of this, it arranged for the correct key to be made available to the contractor and for another appointment to take place on 28 November 2023.
  2. The contractor updated the landlord on 30 November 2023, stating that there were no signs of a leak to the ceiling. The contractor informed the landlord that they had requested for a supervisor to attend and inspect the leak to see if any further work was required. However, there is no evidence to show that this was followed up with, nor communicated to, the resident.
  3. Following the resident’s continued reports of a ceiling leak, the landlord logged a new repair on 4 December 2023 and advised the resident the contractor would be in touch. However, as no one had reached out to the resident, she continued to chase the landlord. She stated that she was “extremely frustrated with the lack of communication and care” she was receiving. Internal emails show that the landlord attempted to chase the contractor to ensure a repair appointment was booked in with the resident. It is evident that there had been a breakdown in communication between the landlord, the contractor and the resident which contributed to the delay in resolving the leak.
  4. Although the contractors were carrying out the appointments, it was the landlord’s responsibility to ensure that repairs were being attended to, and completed, within the timescales set out in its policy. The landlord’s failure to monitor the repair and keep the resident updated meant that she had to chase it for an update. This will have inevitably have caused the resident time and trouble whilst she continued being inconvenienced by the leak. This was a service failure by the landlord.
  5. The repairs to the roof were completed on 28 January 2024. This was approximately 89 days after the resident’s initial report of a leak. This was outside of the timescale set out within the landlord’s repairs policy. The landlord’s failure to repair the leak within an appropriate timeframe impacted the resident as she was regularly having to clean up the water which collected in her living room. This will have impacted the resident and her daughter’s enjoyment of the property and prevented them from having full use of the living room for the period that the leak remained ongoing.
  6. There was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of a roof leak. The landlord failed to co-ordinate with its contractors to ensure that appointments were scheduled within a timely manner with fully equipped contractors. This contributed to the overall delay in resolving the roof leak and impacted the resident’s enjoyment of her home.
  7. In its stage 2 response, the landlord acknowledged that there had been a delay in carrying out the repair to the roof leak. In recognition of this, it offered the following compensation amounts:
    1. £65.13 for partial room loss (5% rent refund).
    2. £300 for time trouble and inconvenience (for damp and mould complaint too).
  8. The landlord’s compensation and remedies policy states that it will offer a 10% rent refund as a room loss allowance after the first 48 hours of the report. Where the landlord deems there to be only a partial room loss, the percentage may be reduced. In accordance with its policy, the landlord’s offer of a 5% rent refund was appropriate.
  9. However, the compensation offered by the landlord for time, trouble and inconvenience does not recognise the detriment to the resident and her household. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident an additional £100 in recognition of the distress the prolonged situation would have caused.
  10. The resident has informed this Service that although the leak stopped for 6-8 weeks following the repair, it has since returned. It is recommended for the landlord to arrange a repair appointment to identify the cause of this leak and take timely action to resolve the issue.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord operates a 2-stage complaints policy.
  2. At stage 1, the response is to be issued within 10 working days. Should there be a need to extend the timescale for a response, the landlord will provide the resident with an explanation and a clear timeline for an expected response date which should not exceed a further 10 working days without good reason.
  3. At the review stage, the landlord’s policy stated that the complaint will be acknowledged within 5 working days of the escalation request and a response issued within 20 working days of the acknowledgement. If more time is needed, the landlord will provide an explanation to the resident containing a clear timeframe for when the response will be received. This should not exceed a further 20 days without good reason.
  4. The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 on 16 January 2024. On 12 February 2024, the landlord informed the resident there would be a delay in issuing a stage 2 response. The stage 2 response was issued on 8 March 2024. This was approximately 39 working days after the resident’s escalation request. Although the landlord informed the resident that there would be a delay in issuing a response, it did not provide a reason for the delay or an expected response time in accordance with its policy.
  5. The landlord acknowledged the delay in issuing a stage 2 response and appropriately offered £50 for this service failure.
  6. However, following the stage 1 complaint response, the resident raised the following complaints:
    1. Concerns about the front door not shutting properly.
    2. Issues with the kitchen drawers and cupboards not being in an adequate state of repair.
    3. Leak from the kitchen window.
    4. Door to daughter’s bedroom jamming shut.
  7. The landlord correctly advised that the above issues would need to be raised as a new complaint (potentially with the voids team) as they were not part of the initial complaint. The resident requested details for the voids team, but this was not provided by the landlord. The landlord should have sent the resident’s complaint to the relevant team and ensured a new formal complaint was logged about the outstanding issues. It was clear that the resident was dissatisfied with the landlord’s handling of the above repairs and that she wished for it to be part of a formal complaint.
  8. The landlord did not appropriately log the resident’s email as a formal complaint and has therefore delayed the complaint from progressing through the internal complaints process. The resident has been advised by this Service to raise the above issues as a new complaint. However, if this has not been raised yet, the landlord is ordered to make contact with the resident and log a new complaint.
  9. This amounted to a service failure by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of a roof leak.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders

  1. The landlord shall take the following action within 4 weeks of the date of this report and provide the Ombudsman with evidence of compliance with these orders:
    1. Apologise to the resident for the failures identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident £360 compensation (in addition to the £415.13 offered in its stage 2 response). This is made up of the following:
      1. £300 for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by the failings identified in this report in regard to damp and mould and the roof leak.
      2. £10 for the missed damp and mould inspection appointment.
      3. £50 in recognition of the service failure in its complaint handling.
  2. The landlord shall take the following action within 2 months of the date of this report and provide the Ombudsman with evidence of compliance with these orders:
    1. Carry out a damp inspection, paying close attention to the flooring of the resident’s daughter’s bedroom. A copy of the report should be provided to the resident and this Service.
    2. If works are required following the damp inspection, a timetable detailing the schedule of works required should be provided to both the resident and this Service within 4 weeks of the inspection.
    3. If no works are required, the reasons for this should be explained to the resident and this Service in writing.
  3. The landlord should reply to this Service with evidence of compliance with these orders within the timescales set out above.

Recommendations

  1. As the resident has reported a re-occurrence of the ceiling leak, it is recommended for the landlord to arrange an inspection to identify the cause of the leak and take action to resolve.
  2. It is recommended for the landlord to consider re-training its staff on complaint handling, having regard to the Code specifically in relation to identifying a new complaint.