St Albans City and District Council — case 202503830

Decision Case ID 202503830 Decision type Investigation Landlord St Albans City and District Council Landlord type Local Authority / ALMO or TMO Occupancy Secure Tenancy Date 31 March 2026 Background The resident has health needs, including a respiratory condition which the landlord is aware of. He complained that damp had returned to his property after earlier repair works. He asked for temporary accommodation. He complained to us because he was unhappy with the landlord’s response.

What the complaint is about The complaint is about the landlord’s: Management of damp and mould. Response to the resident’s request for temporary accommodation. We have also investigated its complaints handling. Our decision (determination) There was maladministration in the landlord’s management of damp and mould. There was service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for temporary accommodation. There was service failure in its complaints handling. We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons The landlord did not fix the damp, missed key repair target times, and left the resident in poor conditions for at least 5 months. The landlord did not act with enough urgency in response to evidence of poor conditions and health concerns. The landlord did not offer redress or find learning in its complaint responses. 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 specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic.

It has due regard to our apologies guidance. No later than 28 April 2026 2 Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £735 made up as follows: £560 for the distress and inconvenience of living with severe damp and mould for at least 5 months and for time and trouble in chasing updates from the landlord £100 for the distress and inconvenience linked to delayed decisions on temporary accommodation £75 for poor complaint handling 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 28 April 2026 3 Complaint handling learning The landlord must conduct an examination of its complaint handling in this case, learnings identified and its proposals for the avoidance of a reoccurrence. This should at minimum cover: why it did not consider compensation in this case how it will ensure complaint responses show learning and apply redress The landlord must provide a copy of its report to the resident and us.

No later than 12 May 2026 Recommendations Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them. Our recommendations The landlord should consider whether it is appropriate to offer the resident compensation for the period between 27 February and 9 April 2025, where it had not yet completed the remedial damp works or provided the resident with temporary accommodation. The landlord should review our learning module on temporary accommodation. It should enrol all relevant staff on it.

This will help ensure future responses meet expected standards. Temporary moves expectations – Housing Ombudsman Our investigation The complaint procedure Date What happened 14 October 2024 The resident made a stage 1 complaint. He said damp had returned to the property following damp repair works 3 years before. He asked the landlord to deal with the damp problem correctly. 14 October 2024 The landlord sent an acknowledgement of the complaint. It said it would respond by 28 October 2024.

4 November 2024 The landlord sent its stage 1 response. It said it had surveyed the property. It had found the cause of the damp. There was a design flaw with the flat roof to the bin store. It would redesign the roof to resolve the cause of the damp. It had raised other repairs orders. 27 January 2025 The resident raised a stage 2 complaint. He said: the landlord had completed some minor works, but had not resolved the main cause of the damp there was poor communication between and with the contractors and incompetence the property was “not liveable”, and he needed alternative temporary accommodation He asked the landlord to fix the cause of the damp and complete all outstanding works.

27 January 2025 The landlord sent an acknowledgment of the complaint. It said it would respond by 25 February 2025. 26 February 2025 The landlord issued its stage 2 response. It said: it had completed 5 of the works orders raised it had received costings to renew the bin store roof it had conducted a further damp survey it would review the survey report and contact the resident to explain if it needed to do any other works if it were necessary, it would offer the resident temporary accommodation it apologised for the length of time taken to complete the works that it had raised Referral to the Ombudsman The resident contacted us.

He said the landlord had not made progress with damp works since the damp survey in January 2025. The landlord had moved him into temporary accommodation. What we have not considered and why A contractor reported on 17 December 2024 that the conditions made it hard to breathe. Another contractor reported on 27 January 2025 there was heavy damp and mould and raised concern for the resident’s health. The resident said he was hospitalised in April 2025 because of the conditions.

We do not doubt this. However, we cannot decide whether the landlord caused any health impact. The resident may wish to seek independent advice about a personal injury claim. 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 management of damp and mould. Finding Maladministration Damp and mould are hazards under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). The Ombudsman takes a zero‑tolerance approach to damp and mould. The landlord’s Housing Repairs Handbook says the landlord must inspect damp and mould within 10 working days. It must make emergencies safe within 24 hours and finish routine repairs within 28 working days. It must use trained staff, seek specialist surveys when needed, and check that repairs have worked.

The landlord has provided evidence of damp issues at the property from 2020. We do not usually investigate events more than 12 months before the complaint process. We have therefore focused on events from December 2023. Any reference to events outside this are for contextual purposes only. On 26 December 2023, the resident reported an uncontainable bathroom leak. The landlord attended within its emergency policy times. The engineer found a design fault with the bin cupboard roof and cleared a blocked outlet pipe.

The landlord found a defect in December 2023, but we have not seen evidence that it addressed the defect beyond its immediate response. Because the defect remained, the conditions for damp stayed in place and made it likely that the damp would return. There is no evidence that the resident reported any new damp or mould between December 2023 and October 2024. Without any reports during this time, the landlord did not know the residual defect it had identified had caused the problem to come back.

On 14 October 2024, the resident reported that the damp had returned and had become worse. The landlord then inspected the home and again found that the design of the bin cupboard roof was causing the damp. On 6 November 2024 the landlord raised repairs, including extensive mould washing for the bathroom, bedroom and lounge, electrical tests, extractor fans and a dehumidifer. It also asked for repairs to and a redesign of the bin store roof. It delivered the dehumidifier on 17 December 2024, 30 working days later.

On 12 December 2024, the landlord requested a new damp survey. The survey took place on 23 January 2025. The landlord has told us that it does not hold the resultant survey report. Its records however show the surveyor sent it on 24 February 2025, and its stage 2 response says it sent the report to its contractor on 25 February. This is of some concern and shows gaps in record keeping practice. In its stage 2 response of 26 February 2025, the landlord accepted it had completed only 5 repair orders.

This was 77 working days later and both completed and outstanding repairs were outside the 28‑day target. The resident said he felt unable to invite visitors to his home because of the conditions. The delays and unresolved defects meant he lived with worsening damp and mould for at least 5 months. He also had to chase the landlord at least 6 times, which added to his inconvenience. The landlord took some positive steps. It arranged specialist surveys, provided a dehumidifier, and raised extensive repairs.

However, it had not put in place a lasting solution to the defects it found in December 2023, meaning the earlier damp returned. It did not complete repairs within its policy time limits. The landlord did not offer redress and did not put things right through the complaint process. Its delays caused undisputed adverse impacts on the resident. In consideration of all circumstances of the case there was maladministration in the landlord’s management of damp and mould. Complaint The landlord’s response to the resident’s request for temporary accommodation.

Finding Service failure The Housing Services Policy says the landlord may provide temporary accommodation when major repairs, damage, or safety issues make a home impractical to live in. It must keep residents informed. The damp and mould policy requires prompt investigation, regular updates, and temporary accommodation when conditions are unsafe. The resident asked for temporary accommodation on 27 January 2025. On 29 January 2025, the surveyor told the landlord the damp and mould were severe.

He said the landlord should treat the property as a void and rehouse the resident. On 30 January 2025, the landlord discussed whether it needed to arrange a temporary or permanent move. In its stage 2 response on 26 February 2025, the landlord said it would arrange temporary accommodation “if works required it”. This shows it recognised a decant might be necessary and linked this to the ongoing technical assessment. The resident continued to live with severe damp and mould until the landlord agreed temporary accommodation after the completion of the internal complaint process on 26 February 2025.

The resident had to chase the landlord for updates as these were not provided by the landlord and this cannot but have caused avoidable distressand inconvenience. Events after the complaints process The landlord provided temporary accommodation from 5 April 2025 to October 2025. It completed extensive works, including damp proofing and renewal of the kitchen, bathroom, and flooring. The resident said the landlord replaced items damaged by damp and mould and he is now satisfied with the property.

Summary The landlord did not act with enough urgency, even though there was clear evidence of hazardous conditions. This did not meet the damp and mould policy. The policy requires prompt action. It also requires clear communication. It also requires temporary accommodation when a home is reportedly unsafe. There were some mitigations. The landlord arranged a specialist damp survey. It approved extensive works. It later provided temporary accommodation. These steps show it took some appropriate action.

However, it did not act fast enough, given the reported impacts. As a result, there was service failure in its response to the resident’s request for temporary accommodation. Complaint The handling of the complaint Finding Service failure The landlord’s complaint policy is compliant with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code). It says it will acknowledge, define, and log a complaint within 5 working days and respond within 10 working days at stage 1 or 20 working days at stage 2.

The landlord acknowledged and responded to the stage 1 complaint within the policy timescale. The landlord issued the stage 2 response 1 working day late, although there is no evidence of harm caused by the delay. Other than the 1 working day delay, the landlord followed the timing requirements of the Code. However, it did not follow the Code’s expectations to be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes. The complaints process also did not fully resolve the core issues that the resident had raised.

The landlord did not consider in its complaint responses how the conditions and repair delays affected the resident. It accepted that the works were extensive and slow, but it did not consider a remedy. It did not offer compensation or explain why it had chosen not to do so. The landlord also did not show any learning in its complaint responses. It apologised for delays but did not explain what it would change or improve. It did not reflect on its missed repair targets, poor communication, or record‑keeping gaps.

It also did not identify any steps to prevent repeat failings. For these reasons, there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling. Learning The damp returned partly because the landlord did not resolve the earlier defects. The case may help the landlord review how it tracks damp and mould cases so it can check that root causes are fixed. The landlord decided on temporary accommodation only after the complaint process. The landlord may wish to reflect on how it assesses risk and how it responds when staff raise serious concerns.

Knowledge information management (record keeping) The case shows gaps in record keeping. The landlord may wish to reflect on how it stores survey reports and how it tracks repairs linked to damp and mould. Our KIM report and the National Federation of Housing Associations guidance on this may be useful reference sources Communication The resident had to chase for updates. The landlord may find it helpful to reflect on how it provides regular updates in complex or prolonged cases.