London Borough of Lambeth — case 202508157

Decision Case ID 202508157 Decision type Investigation Landlord London Borough of Lambeth Landlord type Local Authority / ALMO or TMO Occupancy Secure Tenancy Date 29 January 2026 Background The resident lives in a flat with her son. She reported that a leak from the property above was damaging her property and making it unsafe. She complained that the landlord had not taken any action. What the complaint is about The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s: Reports of a leak damaging her property.

Complaint. Our decision (determination) We have found: Severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a leak damaging her property. Service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint. We have made orders for the landlord to put things right. Summary of reasons The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a leak damaging her property There were a series of significant failures which had a detrimental impact on the resident.

The landlord failed to act on the resident’s initial and repeated leak and safety reports, delayed contacting the property above, and took too long to address safety issues raised by an independent expert. It did not share the expert’s report with the resident’s legal representative as promised, and it failed to consider temporary accommodation or further action to access the property causing the leak. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint The landlord failed to acknowledge the resident’s escalation to stage 2 of its complaint process.

It also delayed slightly in providing its stage 2 response. Putting things right Where we find service failure, maladministration or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction. Orders Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set.

Order What the landlord must do Due date 1 Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure: the apology is provided by a senior manager the apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic it has due regard to our apologies guidance The landlord must provide a copy of this letter to us by the due date. No later than 26 February 2026 2 Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £1,050 made up as follows: £1,000 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the resident’s reports of a leak damaging her property £50 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the resident’s complaint.

This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. The landlord may deduct from the total figure any payments it has already paid. No later than 26 February 2026 3 Specific order The landlord must write to the resident and set out: the action it will take to access the property above to stop the leak whether it will move the resident and her son to temporary accommodation while efforts to stop the leak are ongoing whether it can complete any repairs, or take other steps, to mitigate the housing conditions on her in the meantime if it is unable to move the resident the internal repairs it will complete in the resident’s property, once it has stopped the leak taking into consideration the independent expert’s recommendations.

The landlord must provide a copy of this letter to us by the due date. No later than 26 February 2026 Recommendations Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them. Our recommendations We recommend the landlord considers how it can access properties it does not own, and cannot contact the owner, to stop leaks from them damaging its properties in future. Our investigation The complaint procedure Date What happened 16 May 2025 The resident complained about a leak that had damaged her bathroom, storage cupboard and water cabinet (W.

C). 23 May 2025 The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint. It said it aimed to respond by 9 June 2025. 9 June 2025 The landlord provided its stage 1 response. It did not uphold the resident’s complaint as it had scheduled a disrepair inspection and was due to share the findings via her legal representative. The resident said she was extremely dissatisfied as there had been a leak since March 2025, and the landlord had not taken any action. She said her flat was unsafe as the ceiling and tiling could collapse at any point.

She asked the landlord to take the matter seriously. 15 July 2025 The landlord provided its stage 2 response. It apologised that the leak remained unresolved and for the prolonged disruption and impact on the resident. It said it was actively engaging with the leaseholder of the property above to stop the leak. Additionally, it said it would forward a copy of the independent expert’s report to the resident’s legal representatives, and once they had agreed with the scope of works identified its contractors would arrange and deliver the necessary repairs.

It said that once it had started the repairs it would take approximately 6 weeks to complete. Referral to the Ombudsman The resident referred her complaint to us because she said the leak was ongoing and causing a lot of damage to her property. She said the landlord had not contacted her to arrange repairs and there was no plan to resolve the issues. She was worried about tiles falling off the wall and causing injury to her and her grandchildren. She said she was having to use the toilet and bath in the dark.

She wanted the landlord to complete the repairs and improve its communication and response times. What we found and why The circumstances of this complaint are well known by the parties involved, so it is not necessary to detail everything that’s happened or comment on all the information we’ve reviewed. We’ve only included the key information that forms the basis of our decision of whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration. Complaint The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a leak damaging her property.

Finding Severe maladministration What we did not investigate The resident told us that tiles had fallen from the walls and caused injury to her and her family. It would be fairer, more reasonable and more effective for the resident to make a personal injury claim for this. The courts are best placed to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide on the cause of any issue and how long it will last. We have not investigated this further.

We can decide if a landlord should pay compensation for distress and inconvenience. What we did investigate The landlord raised a repair on 25 March 2025 as the resident reported a leak from a pipe in the wall. The landlord’s repairs policy says that it would respond to a leak from a water pipe within 1 working day. It has not provided evidence of it taking any action. The landlord raised another repair on 31 March 2025 as the resident reported a leak from the property above hers.

She said the leak was coming through her bathroom ceiling, the W.C ceiling was bubbling and she was concerned it could collapse. The landlord attempted to contact the leaseholder of the property above but there was no response. The landlord’s records show that it attended an appointment the same day. It has not provided a record of any action taken. This is a record keeping failure. The resident called the landlord about the leak on 1 April 2025. The landlord contacted the leaseholder of the property above who said they would get an independent plumber to resolve the leak.

It was reasonable for the landlord to try and contact the leaseholder to resolve the source of the leak. On 4 April 2025 the resident requested that a surveyor attended to assess the damage caused by the leak. There is no evidence that the landlord took any action regarding this. The landlord raised a repair to make the resident’s property safe on 9 April 2025 as she said it was about to make the W.C ceiling collapse. Its repairs policy says that emergency repairs included issues that could cause serious health and safety problems and it would attend to these within 24 hours.

However, despite sending internal emails outlining the urgency of the issue, the landlord has not provided a record of any action taken. The landlord’s records also show that the plumber organised by the leaseholder of the property above could not trace the leak. The landlord attempted to contact the leaseholder. It left a voicemail explaining that it would need to arrange for another plumber to attend. The resident reported that the leak was ongoing on 17 April 2025. The resident told us that she contacted the landlord on 25 April 2025 and then reported that the leak was coming through the lights the following day.

The landlord has not provided a record of this. However, it is reasonable to conclude that the resident did report this as the landlord attended on 28 April 2025 and made the light fittings and switches in the bathroom and W.C safe. As the landlord has not provided a record of this, we have been unable to assess whether it acted in line with the timescales in its repairs policy. The landlord raised another repair for the leak on 1 May 2025. However, there is no evidence that it attempted to contact the leaseholder of the property it was coming from until 12 May 2025 after the resident reported it was getting worse.

The landlord noted that its calls kept going through to voicemail. It did not say whether it had left a message. An independent expert inspected the resident’s property on 3 June 2025. Their report outlined issues in the bathroom, separate W.C and hallway storage cupboard. This included electrical wiring being live and easily accessible, a water damaged ceiling, wall plaster board which remained wet and loose wall tiles. They recommended remedial works for this, including accessing the property above to address the leak, and provided a schedule of works.

They said the landlord should be given 2 weeks to arrange contractors with a further 6 weeks to complete the work. In her escalation, the resident reiterated her concerns about the safety of the property, but again the landlord failed to act. The landlord said in its complaint responses that it would send the report to the resident’s legal representatives for agreement on the proposed actions. There is no evidence it has done this. In its stage 2 response the landlord said it was trying to engage with the leaseholder of the property above to stop the leak.

Its repairs policy allows it to force access in critical situations to repair leaks. However, it is unclear whether this applies to properties it does not own. The landlord’s repairs and damp policy says where extensive works may be required, it considered the individual circumstances of the household and whether it was appropriate to move residents out of their home at an early stage. Despite the resident raising safety concerns, the landlord did not consider moving her to temporary accommodation while it resolved the leak.

It also failed to consider whether there were further steps it could take to gain access to the property above. The resident told us the leak was ongoing. The landlord’s records support this and it was still attempting to liaise with the leaseholder of the property above to resolve this. Its records also show that it fitted a plate to cover the exposed wires and made the bathroom tiles safe on 16 October 2025. The landlord’s repairs policy says that it would attend to emergency repairs within 24 hours.

This was over 4 months since the independent expert highlighted this which was an unreasonable delay. The resident has repeatedly raised concerns about safety and explained to the landlord how she felt it had ignored and “neglected” her. The evidence shows that there have been serious failings by the landlord. There was a significant delay in it making the exposed wires and wall tiles safe. The ongoing leak likely had a seriously detrimental impact on the resident. The resident told the landlord that she is unable to use the lights in her bathroom and told us she was having to bathe in the dark.

She has explained the distress this has caused her and that she has been signed off from work. We recognise the difficulty the landlord had in accessing the property above to resolve the leak. However, it is still ongoing and recommendations from the independent expert’s report remain outstanding. Therefore, we have made orders for the landlord to put things right and pay compensation in line with our remedies guidance. Complaint The handling of the resident’s complaint Finding Service failure The landlord’s complaint policy is compliant with the Complaint Handling Code (the Code) published in April 2024.

The resident told us that she complained on 2 April 2025. However, the landlord has not provided a record of this, so we have been unable to assess it. The resident told us that she complained again on 15 May 2025. The landlord has not provided a record of this. However, it is reasonable to consider that the resident did complain as it raised a complaint the following day. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint and provided its stage 1 response within the timeframes in its complaint policy.

However, it did not acknowledge the resident’s escalation as set out in its complaints policy. It also delayed by 6 working days to provide its stage 2 response if it had acknowledged the escalation. The landlord failed to acknowledge the resident’s escalation which may have caused her uncertainty. It also delayed slightly in providing its stage 2 response. The landlord did not acknowledge any complaint handling failures in its response. Therefore, we have ordered the landlord to pay £50 compensation, for the failings the landlord did not recognise and have had minimal impact on the resident, in line with our remedies guidance.

Learning The landlord acknowledged some failings in its stage 2 response. However, the landlord missed an opportunity to identify learning points to address internally in its complaint responses. Knowledge information management (record keeping) The landlord did not provide a record of action taken when it attended an appointment. At times this made it difficult to assess its actions. The landlord was also unable to provide a copy of the resident’s tenancy agreement. Communication On occasion the landlord delayed in attempting to contact the leaseholder of the property above.

It has also not provided any evidence of it sending the inspection report to the resident’s representative.