Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council (202122294)

A blue and grey text

Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202122294

Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council

14 August 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:
1. the landlord’s handling the resident’s reports of leaks, damp and mould at the property;
2. the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damage to her belongings and flooring because of the leak, damp, mould and associated repairs.
This investigation also considers the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident is a tenant of the landlord and has resided in her property, a ground floor two-bedroom flat, since 1999. The property is within a Grade 2 listed building.
The resident has disclosed to the landlord that she was disabled, has asthma and at the time of reporting the damp and mould had recently recovered from pneumonia. The resident also disclosed that she had mental health issues including anxiety, panic attacks, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and depression.

Relevant landlord policies

The landlord’s repairs and maintenance guidance states that it is responsible for maintaining the structure of the building including external walls and roofs. It outlines four priority levels for repairs:
1. Emergency repairs should be attended within 24 hours to make safe.
2. Urgent repairs should be completed within five working days.
3. Routine repairs should be completed within 25 working days.
4. Major works should be completed within 60 working days.
The landlord’s damp and mould process states:
1. If black mould is present a mould wash should be raised “urgently” within five days.
2. A surveyor’s inspection should be booked within five days.
The landlord’s website contains guidance for residents on condensation, damp and mould which states:
1. The landlord has a responsibility to fix the causes of damp and mould where it is caused by a repair or defect.
2. It will fix leaks or blocked guttering “quickly and efficiently” and carry out a ‘mould wash’ to clear mould.
The landlord operates a two-stage complaints process:
1. Stage one complaints will be acknowledged within three working days and responded to within ten working days.
2. Stage two complaints will be acknowledged within three working days and responded to within ten working days.
The landlord’s complaint procedure states that, where a complaint is upheld or partially upheld, it will set out clear timescales for actions that will be taken to put things right.
The landlord’s compensation scheme does not cover statutory payments under the right to repair or liability claims for loss or damage. The landlord provides the following guideline figures for compensation:
1. Total loss of living area – 20% of weekly rent
2. Total loss of bedroom – 20% of weekly rent
3. Use of dehumidifier – £2 per dehumidifier per day

Events prior to the complaint period

The landlord’s repairs log shows that in 2001 it inspected the property for “damp in bedrooms” and a repair was raised to fit an air brick to the second bedroom and to “dig out front of wall below [damp proof course]”. Further inspections of “damp in bedrooms” were carried out in 2009. In October 2015 an inspection was carried out of “wetness and mould caused by leak and maybe need fungal solution”. A “damp kit” was applied and a dehumidifier provided.

Summary of events during complaint period

On 31 December 2021 the resident reported that there was a leak coming up through the floor in her second bedroom.
On 1 January 2022 the resident emailed the landlord a video which shows dark-coloured water puddled on the wooden flooring in her second bedroom.
On 4 January 2022 the landlord’s repair log shows that an inspection was raised and that it was noted that the floor under the bedroom flooring was concrete.
The resident contacted the landlord on 4 January 2022 to make a formal complaint regarding leak, damp and mould issues in her bedroom. The resident stated that she had been reporting damp “for years” and had been told by the landlord to bleach the mould. The resident said:
1. her health was declining and she had asthma
2. damage had been caused to her furniture – a chest of drawers, bed, mattress, rug, and flooring
3. she suffered from anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, panic attacks and severe depression
4. the bedroom was a “health risk”.
Along with her stage one complaint, the resident provided photographs of her bedroom. The photographs show black mould on walls and wooden/laminate flooring.
The resident emailed the landlord on 6 January 2022 regarding the leak, damp and mould. She stated that she was disabled, had chest complaints, pneumonia and was asthmatic. She also stated that she “had to sleep in my living room sometimes”.
On 13 January 2022 the resident contacted the landlord and said she was still waiting for repairs operatives to attend. She had been advised by the landlord’s repairs team that it was waiting for the ‘go ahead’ to remove a panel in the bedroom to see if the source of the leak could be found. The resident said the room smelled of damp and “the fungus, black and white spores are breeding” and that her belongings continued to be damaged. She stated that she was disabled and had pneumonia and asthma alongside mental ill-health.
The landlord noted in its complaint log that it would not pay compensation as the leak had “not been caused by operative work”. It also stated that no leak had been found to the incoming water mains supply and that the leak appeared to be coming either from a boxed-in stack in the bedroom, or from the kitchen of a neighbouring property. The note stated that an asbestos report would be required for the boxing-in and access to the neighbouring property to be arranged.
The resident contacted the landlord on 3 February 2022 as the she had not received any repair updates. The resident said that the wall was “black, damp and WET…there is fungus growing in black and white”. She stated that her asthma was being exacerbated and she had suffered pneumonia “from inhaling possibly the microbes from the fungus” and her depression and anxiety were worsening. She again attached photographs of her bedroom which show black mould to the wall, skirting boards and flooring.
On 24 February 2022 the resident emailed the landlord and stated the leak, which she had reported as an emergency on 31 December 2021, had still not been repaired. She said she had been telephoning the landlord weekly for updates but had heard nothing from the landlord. The resident said she had had to dispose of more clothing damaged by damp and mould and that her mental health and breathing was being impacted.
The resident sent a further email on 25 February 2022 attaching images of her bedroom which show black mould on the walls, skirting, and wooden flooring. The skirting boards appear to be rotten and the resident described that the bottom of one of the walls appeared to be bulging. The resident stressed that she was disabled and her breathing was being affected along with her mental health. She again stated that no one from the landlord had been in contact with her.
On 1 April 2022 the resident contacted the landlord to advise that she had raised her complaint with this Service as she had “been neglected for [four] months now”. She stated that she had requested compensation due to a leak and damage to her bedroom and that her mental health was being impacted by having to “awake daily to look into the heavily stained ruined bedroom that needs repairing”.
Internal landlord communications dated 5 April 2022 demonstrates that an order had been raised to remove some boxing within the resident’s bedroom “to identify and remedy a leak possibly from a pipe within this boxing”. Emails stated that the landlord was awaiting results from asbestos testing before it could carry out the works.
Further internal landlord communications on 5 April 2022 stated that the resident was withholding payment of rent due to the repair issues.
On 6 April 2022 the landlord contacted this Service and stated:
1. The resident had “two stage 1 open complaints registered on our system”, both relating to the same repair issues of leaks, damp and mould.
2. The landlord had carried out the following repairs to “eliminate penetration damp into the lounge”:
  1. Repairs to the condense pipe for a neighbouring property
  2. Clearance of gutters and the downpipe to the communal entry roof.
3. It had been awaiting asbestos testing to pipework boxing in the bedroom and an appointment had been arranged with the resident for 21 April 2022 for a plumber to attend to identify the source of the leak and carry out a repair.
4. A report had been requested to ascertain what repairs were required to make good the damage caused by the leak. The results of this report would be shared with the resident and a full complaint response provided.
Internal emails between the landlord and its contractor on 25 April 2022 state that the landlord was “in the clear on this one” as the leak had “just randomly occurred”. The emails stated that “If [the contractor] did not cause the leak, tenant cannot claim from us. Would need to go through their insurance”.
On 28 April 2022 internal landlord emails state that no repair orders had been raised. It stated that there was “potentially rising damp” and that the building was grade two listed so the guttering could not be replaced. The landlord stated it needed:
1. a damp survey
2. replacement of a broken soil pipe at ground level
3. unblocking of gutters and downpipe.
On 5 May 2022 the landlord contacted its contractor and asked that it attend more quickly than appointed as the property was the subject of a complaint.
Communications between the landlord and a contractor demonstrate that on 12 May 2022 the guttering to the property was unblocked and cleared. The contractor reported that the lower wall of the property was damp due to problems with the gutter above the communal entrance, which was falling backwards towards the wall instead of the water travelling to the down pipe. It stated that the gutters on the building were all cast metal and “in poor condition” and that the fascia board was rotten.
The landlord raised a request on 16 May 2022 for its contractor to repair the gutter and replace the fascia board to the property.
On 17 May 2022 the resident escalated her complaint to stage two of the complaints process. She said that she had made a claim for compensation but had not received a response. She also stated that operatives had attended to take photographs and inspect the issue but no repairs had taken place. The resident advised she was concerned about her health due to the mould spores and her pre-existing health issues and that her bedroom needed treating and redecorating.
The resident contacted the landlord on 6 June 2022 stating that her complaint had been closed incorrectly as there appeared to be confusion regarding her complaint. She clarified that whilst she had experienced a leak in her living room due to a leaking gutter and this had caused extensive damp, this had been repaired. Her complaint was with regard to a separate leak from a pipe which had caused damp and mould in her bedroom. She stated that investigation of the leak had caused damage to her flooring.
A damp report was provided by a subcontractor on 14 June 2022 following a survey carried out on 10 June 2022. The report stated:
1. The rear bedroom was the only room inspected.
2. Visible damp staining was observed to the bedroom walls and “abnormally high moisture levels” were recorded from the walls and floor by an electric moisture meter.
3. Rising damp was indicated suggesting a failure of the damp proof course along with ingress from water leaks.
4. The following works were advised:
  1. Maintain all rainwater goods and clear debris.
  2. Damp proof all walls
  3. Remove existing render.
  4. Inject a new chemical damp course.
  5. Fit a cavity drain membrane from floor to ceiling.
  6. Replaster.
  7. Install an airbrick to provide additional ventilation.
  8. Remove existing flooring and apply vapour membrane to the solid floor before laying new flooring.
This Service wrote to the landlord on 28 July 2022 and advised it to respond to the resident by 11 August 2022.
On 11 August 2022 the landlord emailed the resident provided the resident with a stage two complaint response. It stated:
1. It was investigating the resident’s stage two complaint regarding an ongoing leak, damp and mould, and damage to the resident’s property and belongings.
2. It was in receipt of a damp survey completed by a subcontractor and a report by its own surveyor.
3. There was a combination of “interstitial damp and as a result of condensation and lateral penetrating damp from the leaking gutters and poor designed condense pipe from the property above”
4. As the building was Grade 2 listed, the landlord’s “ability to implement the recommendations” of the damp survey were limited.
5. The block was due to undergo major refurbishments “in the next 12 months”.
6. The landlord had “failed to communicate effectively” with the resident and “too much time taken between receipt of the survey and a solution being found”. It apologised for this.
Between 19 August and 23 August 2022 internal emails between the landlord’s insurance team and its housing maintenance team demonstrate that the landlord was assessing its liability to pay compensation. It stated that the resident was claiming a total of £1,117 for damage to clothing, furniture, soft furnishings, and flooring. The resident had sent the landlord a photograph of a pile of furniture and other items piled outside her property as proof of the damage. A surveyor stated “the flat is suffering from neglect to the exterior…also the tenant contributory negligence for mould growth by not keeping the interior ventilated and warm to prevent condensation on the wall surfaces”.
The resident contacted the landlord on 1 October 2022 and stated that her complaints had been closed as when the surveyor had attended the walls were dry as there had been no rain. However it had recently rained heavily and her bedroom was now leaking again. The resident said she had “sat down and cried…I don’t seem to be taken seriously”. She said that the landlord had advised it was her responsibility to redecorate but she was disabled and she had no furniture to put clothes away in as they had all been ruined by damp and mould.
The landlord’s insurance team contacted the resident on 17 October 2022 stating that it needed to establish the cause of damage to the resident’s items to determine whether the landlord was liable to pay compensation. This was because damp and mould could be caused by “storing large amounts of good in enclosed spaces, not heating or ventilating rooms enough… it is very difficult to firmly establish the exact cause and also the Council would have no responsibility for damage caused prior to being notified of a problem.” The resident replied on the same date stating that she wanted to cry as she felt she was not believed by the landlord and that the damage was caused by a leak which caused mould and was witnessed by landlord staff.
Internal landlord emails dated 7 November 2022 demonstrate that:
1. A surveyor inspected the block externally on 26 October 2022 and noted defects to the external guttering which could have been the cause of the damp to the resident’s property.
2. A repair was raised for the guttering and scaffolding was erected on 4 November 2022.
3. The surveyor carried out an internal inspection on 4 November 2022 and found damp staining in the lounge and both bedrooms, and there was an odour of damp plaster in the kitchen.
4. The damp in the lounge and kitchen was likely due to the defective guttering. Once the guttering had been repaired a dehumidifier would be supplied to aid drying.
5. There had been a significant and longstanding leak in the rear bedroom which had been resolved but had caused damp to the external walls of the room.
6. There was also a “freestanding screen wall” which butted up to the external wall outside the property and this was a “contributory source of the damp noted”. The screen wall should be separated from the external wall with a vertical damp proof course.
7. The front bedroom wall was stained but damp readings were normal. The staining was over most of the wall and was “more typical of condensation than of rising or penetrating damp”. Installation of thermal insulating board would be a straightforward option to reduce the risk of condensation.
8. There was an external crack in the brickwork in one location but no other evidence of failure of the damp proof course.
An email from the landlord’s insurance team on 16 November 2022 stated that the resident had accepted a compensation offer of £450 from the landlord.
On 5 December 2022 the resident escalated her complaint regarding leaks, damp and mould to this Service.
The landlord contacted its contractor on 10 December 2023 advising that the guttering had still not been repaired.
Internal landlord emails dated 20 December 2022 demonstrate that the guttering at the rear of the block appeared to have been resolved but that the guttering at the front of the building remained loose and water was still spilling down the building causing dampness to the resident’s property.
On 16 January 2023 the resident contacted the landlord to state she had another leak in her bedroom and mould growing on her mattress. She also said that the damp in her living room was spreading and had reached the electrical sockets. The resident stated that she was being “fobbed off” by the landlord who claimed the issue was ventilation but that her home was well ventilated and water was coming into the property.
Internal landlord emails from 17 January 2023 confirmed that works were raised in November 2022 to repair leaking guttering which was affecting the resident’s living room and kitchen. These works had been cancelled as the roof of the block was due to be replaced in April 2023 under planned works. The landlord stated that there was “significant damp internally” for which it had offered the resident compensation. The landlord:
1. Re-raised the repair to the guttering and fascia.
2. Raised an emergency electrician appointment to inspect the electrical sockets affected by the leak.
3. Raised works for mould washes to be carried out.
4. Ordered dehumidifiers for the property.
The landlord’s repair records show that a mould wash was carried out to the resident’s living room and bedroom on 17 January 2023. A dehumidifier was delivered on 18 January 2023 but it was reported as not working on 24 January 2023 so was replaced.
On 24 February 2023 the landlord paid the resident £160 as redress for the cost of running the dehumidifier. This was calculated at £5 per day for 32 days.
In response to recent communication from this Service, the resident has stated that:
1. She continued to experience water leaking into both bedrooms in the property.
2. As a result of the leaks, damp, and mould in the bedrooms she was been sleeping on a sofa in her living room. She stated she had told the landlord’s surveyors this.
3. The landlord advised her that the problem was condensation due to lack of ventilation and that she should wash the walls with bleach. The resident disagreed as she stated that when it rained you could see water “trickle” through.
4. The landlord had not paid her any compensation for her damaged flooring as it said it was “old anyway” and had advised her that she was responsible for redecorating. She could not redecorate due to the continued leak and also because of her disability.
The resident has provided this Service with photographs of the property which are date stamped 17 July 2023. The photographs show:
1. The second bedroom:
  1. water staining to the ceiling
  2. a substantial amount of black mould spotting to the walls and skirting boards
  3. discolouration to the paint on the walls where water has run down.
2. Living room:
  1. Paint peeled off the walls
  2. Uneven, bumpy and crumbling plaster.
3. Main bedroom:
  1. Discolouration and black spots on the paint on the walls above the bed.
In response to further information requests from this Service, the landlord has provided:
1. A damp and condensation survey of the property dated 26 July 2023. The report stated:
  1. There were “signs of lateral penetration”, probably from the guttering and downpipe.
  2. High moisture readings were found in the skirting which put them “at higher risk of fungal decay”.
  3. Black spot fungi and high moisture readings present in the entrance hall ceiling and right external wall.
  4. The contractor recommended investigating the gutters, downpipe and drainage to the property and carrying out required repairs.
2. Its self-assessment against the Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on damp and mould dated July 2023.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

This Service recognises that this situation has caused the resident distress as she has experienced a leak and associated damp and mould to her property over a prolonged period of time. Aspects of the complaint relate to the impact of her living conditions on her health. Where the Ombudsman identifies failure on a landlord’s part, we can consider the resulting distress and inconvenience. However, unlike a court, we cannot establish liability or calculate and award damages, this would usually be dealt with as a personal injury claim through the courts. Though the Ombudsman is unable to evaluate medical evidence, it will be taken into account when considering the resident’s circumstances.
It is noted as background context to this investigation that the resident initially reported damp in her bedrooms in 2001, and that repair logs indicate that the landlord carried out further inspections in 2009 and 2015. This investigation has however primarily focussed on the landlord’s handling of the resident’s recent reports from December 2021 onwards that were considered during the landlord’s recent complaint responses. However, the resident’s repair reports have been considered in respect of the landlord’s handling of the issues raised from 2021 onwards.

The landlord’s handling the resident’s reports of leaks, damp and mould at the property

Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places a statutory obligation on the landlord to keep the structure and exterior of the property in repair. The landlord also has a responsibility under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System, 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 damp and mould problems in its properties amount to a hazard and require remedying.
The landlord has been aware of damp in the property since 2001 and carried out inspections of the issue in 2001, 2009, and 2015. Following the resident’s reports of a leak in December 2021 and subsequent formal complaint in January 2022 the landlord failed to carry out a damp survey on the property until June 2022.
The Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould published in October 2021, just prior to the substantive issues of this case, 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, feels that the landlord is taking the issue seriously and that the matter is progressing”. In this case the resident has not been kept informed and has had to chase the landlord for a response and resolution on at least seven occasions.
The resident did not feel that the landlord was listening to her as demonstrated when she communicated to the landlord in October 2022 that she had sat down and cried as the landlord was not taking her seriously.
The landlord’s own policy states that major works should be completed within 60 working days. It is unacceptable that more than 18 months after making a formal complaint the resident remains living in a leaking, damp and mouldy property.
The landlord’s stage two complaint response in August 2022, eight months after the leak was reported and the resident complained about damp and mould, confirmed that the property was damp. It also stated that the landlord’s ability to resolve the issue was “limited” due to the building being grade two listed.
It is accepted that the landlord has plans to carry out major refurbishment works to the building. It is also accepted that the property is grade 2 listed and that this brings additional difficulties as the landlord is required to apply for listed building consent from the planning department. However, this Service has seen no evidence to suggest that the landlord had applied for consent and that there was a delay.
The landlord is not absolved of its responsive repair duty just because it has plans to carry out refurbishment work at an as-yet-undecided date in the future. The stage two complaint response provided a vague timeframe of “in the next 12 months”. No other actions or timeframes were proposed to resolve the leaks, damp and mouldor to explore interim measures to reduce the ongoing detriment to a vulnerable resident.
The landlord has failed in its obligation to keep in good repair the structure of the premises. The leak and damage reported by the resident remain unresolved. This is unreasonable and amounts to severe failings.
It is of considerable concern to this Service that a disabled resident has been sleeping on a sofa in her living room, seemingly with the knowledge of the landlord, for a period of 83 weeks from 6 January 2022 to the date of this report. Such a situation is unacceptable.
The landlord has been made aware of the resident’s disability and therefore it was unreasonable of it to advise her to carry out mould washes an redecoration works herself. This advice was particularly unhelpful given that the issues of leak, damp and mould were ongoing and so repeated action would have been required by the resident.
Given that the poor condition of the property is a result of disrepair, it would be reasonable for the landlord to incorporate redecoration works and replacement flooring into the overall schedule of works to rectify the leaks, damp and mould have been completed. An order has therefore been made accordingly.
It is acknowledged that the landlord has instructed a further damp and mould survey and this was carried out after this investigation commenced. Whilst it is proper that the landlord obtain an up-to-date assessment of the issue, the results were the same as the surveys carried out in June 2022 and November 2022.
This Service recognises that the landlord has carried out a self-assessment against the Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on damp and mould and this is to its credit. A recommendation has been made for the landlord to keep the Service appraised of its progress against identified improvements.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damage to her belongings and flooring because of the leak, damp, mould and associated repairs

This Service notes that the language used by the landlord in internal communications of April 2022 that the landlord was “in the clear” with regards to having to pay compensation as the leak just “randomly” occurred is somewhat concerning. We would remind the landlord that its aim should have been to resolve the issue for the resident and not to evade accepting blame for it.
This Service does not agree that the landlord had no responsibility to compensate the resident for damage to her belongings. The landlord’s responsibilities to keep the structure in good repair are laid out within the tenancy agreement and within the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
The landlord was right to provide the resident compensation for damage to her belongings. It was not fair however that the landlord decided not to pay any compensation for the floor covering as it was old. An order has been made for the landlord to fit new flooring to the resident’s second bedroom when the remedial repairs have been completed.
During her communications with the landlord’s insurance team the resident was left feeling that she was not believed. Whilst this Service accepts that the landlord was correct to ensure that it fully investigated the cause of the damage, it should have communicated with empathy befitting the obvious distress the vulnerable resident was experiencing.
Overall, the landlord was right to compensate the resident for loss and damage of her belongings. However, it should have considered contributing to the cost of new flooring and have been more empathetic in its communication. Therefore a finding of service failure has been made.

Complaint handling

This Service has seen no evidence that the landlord provided a stage one response to the resident’s first complaint raised on 4 January 2022, or her second complaint raised on 16 February 2022. The landlord has stated that it believes stage one responses were sent, but that the responsible officer had left the organisation and it had been unable to retrieve these. The landlord has therefore failed to adhere to its own complaints process and to the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code).
The landlord only provided a written response to the resident’s complaint on 11 August 2022 following direction from this Service. A resident should not have to resort to contacting the Ombudsman in order to affect a response from their landlord. The complaint response was provided eight months after the resident first raised her complaint. The landlord therefore unduly delayed in providing a complaint response and therefore failed to adhere to its own policy and to the Code.
The landlord’s stage two complaint response acknowledged that the landlord had failed to communicate effectively with the resident but provided no redress except an apology.
The landlord’s complaint process has failed to bring about a resolution to the resident’s substantive complaint and therefore has failed to ‘put things right’ in line with the Ombudsman’s dispute resolution principles.
It is right that the landlord made an award of £450 compensation to the resident for damage to her belongings and flooring, and a further award of £160 in respect to additional costs of running a dehumidifier. These payments were not made until November 2022 and February 2023, significantly after the stage two complaint response and closure of the resident’s complaint in August 2022.
However, this Service has seen no evidence that the landlord considered the resident’s time, trouble, distress, or inconvenience caused by the landlord’s delay in responding to the substantive issue or complaint handling delays. An order for further compensation has been made.
The landlord failed to follow its own complaints process or adhere to the Code in handling the resident’s complaint. The landlord did not provide any stage one responses and its stage two complaint response was inadequate as it did not clearly identify itself as a formal response and did not provide a timeline of actions that would be completed to resolve the substantive issue. The landlord failed to acknowledge the resident’s vulnerabilities and to provide redress for the severe impact that its failures had on her. Therefore there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was:
1. Severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling the resident’s reports of leaks, damp and mould at the property;
2. Service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damage to her belongings and flooring because of the leak, damp, mould and associated repairs.
3. Severe maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling

Reasons

The landlord’s failure to respond to the resident’s report of leaks leading to potentially hazardous damp and mould with sufficient urgency has resulted in a disabled resident sleeping on her sofa for a protracted period. The landlord has failed to proactively manage the repair which caused the resident to feel ignored, distressed and continuously chasing for an update. 18 months after the resident’s report, she continues to live in a damp and mouldy property with ongoing leaks.
The landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for compensation for her damaged belongings lacked empathy and failed to properly consider the damage to her flooring.
The landlord has been unable to demonstrate that it provided the resident with any stage one complaint responses and therefore that in acted in line with its own policy or the Code. Its complaint procedure failed to resolve the substantive issue or provide the resident with any redress for the distress, inconvenience, time and trouble of her situation.

Orders

A senior officer of the landlord to apologise to the resident within four weeks of the date of this report.
The landlord to pay the resident compensation of £4,480 comprising:
1. £500 for failing to evidence that it provided a stage one complaint response;
2. £500 for time and trouble due to communication failings;
3. £750 for distress and inconvenience;
4. £2,730 for reduced enjoyment of the two bedrooms. This has been calculated as follows:
  1. Reduced enjoyment of the second bedroom – 10% of the weekly rent (£109.78 per week) for a period of 83 weeks – this totals £910 (rounded).
  2. Reduced enjoyment of the main bedroom – 20% of the weekly rent for a period of 83 weeks – this totals £1,820 (rounded).
The compensation ordered should be paid within four weeks of the date of this report and is in addition to the £450 already paid by the landlord.
Within four weeks of the date of this report the landlord to provide a timeframe to the resident for the major refurbishment works to the building.
Within four weeks of the date of this report the landlord provides written assurances to the resident that it will provide and fit replacement laminate flooring and underlay of a similar standard to that fitted by the resident to the resident’s bedroom when the leak, damp and mould have been resolved.
Within four weeks of the date of this report the landlord provides written assurances that it will redecorate all rooms effected when the leaks, damp and mould have been resolved.
The landlord to implement improvements identified in its self-assessment against the Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on damp and mould. The landlord should provide this Service with a timeline of implementation and publicise its progress on its website.