Applications are open to join the next Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel – find out more Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel.

Ipswich Borough Council (202105577)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202105577

Ipswich Borough Council

21 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

  1. The landlord’s response to reports of damp and mould within the resident’s property.
  2. The landlord’s response to the resident’s request to be rehoused on medical grounds.
  3. The Ombudsman has also looked at the handling of the associated complaint.

Jurisdiction

  1. What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. When a complaint is brought to the Ombudsman, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.
  2. Paragraph 42(k) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme states the Ombudsman may not consider a complaint which falls properly within the jurisdiction of another ombudsman, regulator, or complaint-handling body.
  3. The resident has stated that part of her complaint is about the landlord’s response to her request to be rehoused on medical grounds. Rehousing requests which are undertaken on behalf of the Local Authority in accordance with its allocation policy are outside the Housing Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. Complaints about rehousing under a local authority fall within the jurisdiction of the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO).
  4. After carefully considering all the evidence, in accordance with paragraph 42K of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the resident’s complaint about her request to be rehoused on medical grounds is outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. The resident may be able to refer the complaint about this issue to the LGSCO if she wishes to pursue it further.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord. The resident has a lung condition.
  2. On 5 March 2020, the resident submitted a complaint to the landlord. She stated that she has been reporting damp issues within the house for two years without any resolution to the issue.
  3. The landlord responded to the resident’s complaint on 11 March 2020. It stated that a visit to the resident’s property was carried out on 9 March 2020. The landlord also explained that it agreed to organise for the black mould to be cleaned off the surfaces.
  4. The resident submitted another complaint to the landlord on 10 December 2020. The resident stated that she had been left to live with damp problems at her property. She stated that the cause of the problem was poor maintenance in the loft and her health had suffered because of the damp and mould issues.
  5. On 19 March 2021, the landlord provided its stage one complaint response. It stated that the resident’s property was inspected on 17 December 2020. The landlord agreed to redecorate the areas affected by mould growth as a gesture of goodwill. It also explained that the resident should clean areas where the mould has settled. The resident also contacted the landlord on 19 March 2021 stating that she was unhappy with the landlord’s response.
  6. On 30 June 2021, the landlord provided its stage two complaint response. It stated that the defects seen during the visit related to mould and not damp. The landlord explained that its surveyor installed probes at the resident’s property on 25 June 2021 to measure the moisture in the air and the temperature. The landlord offered the resident decoration vouchers for the value of £100. It also stated that it was exploring options to overcome the risk of any cold bridging. The options included adding insulation to the sofit area and laying an additional layer of loft insulation. The landlord also explained that it would look at adding more cross ventilation into the roof space to avoid any sweating. It stated that the extractor fan in the resident’s bathroom and kitchen also needs to be altered.
  7. The landlord provided its stage three complaint response on 27 July 2021. The landlord stated that it was satisfied that a thorough inspection of the property had taken place to identify any defects. It stated that the defects which had been identified were in the process of being actioned. However, the landlord stated as a gesture of goodwill it would be prepared to appoint a specialist cleaning company to treat the mould patches and decorate the affected areas at the resident’s property. It stated that the offer to treat and redecorate the mould affected areas replaces the previous offer of the £100 decoration vouchers it offered in its stage two complaint response.
  8. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and submitted her complaint to the Ombudsman. She stated that her desired outcome was for the landlord to resolve the damp and mould issue within her property. She also stated that she would like the landlord to improve its communication with her by ensuring all correspondence received from her is acknowledged and responded to.
  9. The landlord has told the Ombudsman that the works to fit the ventilation system, treat the mould and redecorate the locations where the mould was present as agreed in its stage three complaint response are still outstanding. The landlord has experienced issues accessing the resident’s property to complete the works.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s response to reports of damp and mould within the resident’s property.

  1. The landlord’s tenancy handbook states if a resident reports a damp, mould or condensation issue, the landlord will ask the resident to carry out several simple steps to resolve the issue. Examples of the steps include residents heating their homes to a reasonable level or wiping down small patches of mould with anti-fungal spray. The handbook states if there is no improvement after the resident has followed the steps, the resident should contact the landlord to arrange an appointment.
  2. The resident initially submitted a complaint to the landlord about damp and mould patches in March 2020. The landlord agreed in its complaint response that it would organise for the mould to be cleaned off the surfaces and asked the contractor to contact the resident by 12 March 2020 to arrange an appointment. The works to clean the mould were not completed by the agreed date as Covid-19 restrictions came into place in March 2020. The Ombudsman recognises the delay due to Covid-19 restrictions would have been out of the landlord’s control. This is because many landlords suspended all non-emergency repairs during this time in line with government guidance to reduce contact between households. However, the landlord sent a letter in error to the resident dated 1 April 2020 explaining that it had completed the redecoration and cleaning of the mould at the resident’s property. Following this, the resident informed the landlord that no work had been carried out due to Covid-19 restrictions. The resident also explained that she did not want any work operatives in the property during COVID-19, as it would cause a serious risk to her health due to her lung condition.
  3. The Ombudsman recognises that it would have been distressing for the resident to receive a letter with inaccurate information from the landlord that the works had been completed. The landlord did apologise for the error, however, considering the resident was living in damp and mould conditions with a lung condition. the Ombudsman does not believe that the apology appropriately reflects the distress the resident would have experienced from the error.
  4. The resident submitted an additional complaint about the damp and mould in the December 2020. The landlord explained in its complaint response in March 2021 that it would redecorate the areas affected by the mould growth. However, it also stated that the resident should clean the areas where the mould had settled. The landlord also referenced in its stage three complaint response that the resident should be cleaning the areas where the mould had settled.
  5. The Ombudsman believes it was unreasonable for the landlord to ask the resident to clean the mould patches, particularly because the landlord was aware that the resident had a lung condition. It is evident that the landlord did not consider the resident’s medical circumstances when it asked her to clean the mould patches. The Ombudsman acknowledges that the request must have been difficult and distressing for the resident. The Ombudsman believes it is appropriate for the landlord to pay the resident compensation as detailed further below to recognise the distress caused by the inappropriate request.
  6. Aside from this unreasonable advice, the landlord completed reasonable steps to resolve the mould issue within the resident’s property. It initially agreed to clean and redecorate the mould affected area. In addition, the landlord arranged for a surveyor to visit and inspect the resident’s property on 25 June 2021. The surveyor’s report recommended the landlord to carry out various works to help resolve the damp and mould issue. The recommendations included changing the extractor fan in the kitchen and ensuring the bathroom extractor fan was correctly installed. It also included re-laying the insulation in the loft, adding a ventilation system in the loft ceiling, and adding vents in the roof. The landlord agreed to carry out the works the surveyor recommended. Therefore, the landlord carried out reasonable steps in response to the mould issue within the resident’s property.
  7. The landlord has told the Ombudsman that it has completed the insulation and added vents to the roof. It also confirmed that it replaced the extractor fan in the kitchen and bathroom in April 2023. The landlord has experienced issues accessing the resident’s property to install the extractor fans, which resulted in the fans being installed later than expected. In addition, the ventilation system is yet to be installed, because the landlord has experienced issues accessing the resident’s property. The Ombudsman acknowledges that the resident informed the landlord that she cannot take any additional time off work to accommodate repair appointments. However, the landlord would not be responsible for any delays due to it being unable to gain access to the property. Going forward, the landlord should work with the resident to arrange a suitable time to complete the outstanding works. If possible, the landlord may want to consider carrying out the outstanding works on a weekend, if it is more convenient. The landlord should also arrange for the areas with mould to be cleaned and redecorated if this has not yet been completed.
  8. Overall, there has been maladministration by the landlord in its response to reports of damp and mould within the resident’s property. It would be appropriate for the landlord to pay the resident compensation of £250 to recognise the distress caused by the inaccurate letter it sent to the resident. The compensation is to also reflect the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord when it asked the resident to clean the damp and mould, when they were aware that she had a lung condition. The amount of compensation awarded is in line with the Ombudsman’s Remedies Guidance (published on our website), which sets out the Ombudsman’s approach to compensation. The Remedies Guidance suggests awards of £100 to £600 where there has been a failure by the landlord which adversely affected the resident but there was no permanent impact from the failure.

The landlord’s complaint handling.

  1. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (The Code) sets out the Ombudsman’s expectations for landlords’ complaint handling practices. The Code states that a stage one response should be provided within ten working days of the complaint. It also explains that a stage two response should be provided within 20 working days from the request to escalate the complaint. The landlord’s complaints procedure policy also includes the same stage one and stage two response timescales as The Code.
  2. The resident submitted a complaint to the landlord on 10 December 2020 about the damp and mould issues within her property. It then took around three months for landlord to provide its stage one complaint response, which was issued on 19 March 2021. The response time was late and not compliant with the timescales referenced in the landlord’s complaints policy or The Code.
  3. It also took around three months for the landlord to provide its stage two complaint response. On 19 March 2021, the resident contacted the landlord and explained that she was unhappy with the landlord’s stage one complaint response. Following this, the resident emailed the landlord in April and May 2021 and stated that she had still not received a response to her complaint. The landlord provided its stage two complaint response to the resident on 30 June 2021. The delay would have caused inconvenience for the resident as she had to chase the landlord for a response, and she was delayed in progressing the complaint to the Ombudsman because she needed to wait for the landlord’s final response before contacting our service.
  4. Given the delay in the landlord providing its stage one and two complaint responses. It would be appropriate for the landlord to pay the resident £200 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused. The amount of the compensation is appropriate to recognise the delay the resident experienced. It is also compliant with the Remedies Guidance as set out above.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s response to reports of damp and mould within the resident’s property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 42(k) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the complaint relating to the resident’s request to be rehoused on medical grounds is outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

  1. The landlord to pay the resident £250 compensation for its response to reports of damp and mould within the resident’s property.
  2. The landlord to pay the resident £200 compensation for its complaint handling.
  3. These payments should be made within four weeks of the date of this report.
  4. The landlord to fit the ventilation system and treat the mould and redecorate the locations where the mould was present, as agreed in its stage three complaint response.
  5. The landlord shall contact this Service within six weeks of this determination to confirm that it has arranged a date with the resident to complete the above works.