Housing Ombudsman tells London borough to pay £18,800 in compensation after failings in three different cases

The Housing Ombudsman has made three findings of severe maladministration in three cases involving Waltham Forest Council, including poor handling of a damp and mould case involving a vulnerable resident and another resident experiencing anti-social behaviour (ASB) for 5 years.

In Case A, the Ombudsman found severe maladministration for how Waltham Forest handled a damp and mould repair, in particular its planning and project management in relation to works to resolve the issue after the landlord initially closed the case without doing any repairs or letting the resident know it had done this. Records did not indicate why this happened, according to the Ombudsman. It took 11 months for the landlord to arrange an inspection of the home and another month for any works to be planned.

The resident and her family, which included an autistic son, asked about moving whilst works were ongoing but did not receive a reply. Whilst she tried to stay during this time, they all eventually moved out into a caravan due to the conditions.

The Ombudsman said the landlord did not take into account the needs of the resident and her family during this time, as works can impact different people in different ways. It failed to consider the resident’s disability and the vulnerabilities of her son and husband. It therefore failed to have due regard to its duties set out in the Equality Act 2010.

The resident also raised concerns about the condition of her furniture which had been impacted during the repairs and the quality of the works several times, eventually leading Waltham Forest to replace the team of contractors. The landlord appointed a manager to personally oversee the case after considerable input from the resident, but this did not prevent a failure to proactively communicate with the resident throughout, significantly harmful emotionally and physically on the resident.

The Ombudsman called on the council to pay the resident £2,737 in compensation, arrange for a senior member of the organisation to apologise, and organise refresher training for all staff in complaint handling, especially around timescales in the Complaint Handling Code.

In Case B, the Ombudsman made a finding of severe maladministration for how Waltham Forest responded to the succession application following the death of the resident’s mother, leaving the administration of the non-succession of the resident’s tenancy for seven years. This was an unacceptable length of time, the Ombudsman said. During this time, the landlord accepted rent payments from the resident and adjusted rent levels as standard. It was only during a fraud check did they take any action.

In addition to this the landlord, part of a wider local authority, also contacted the resident regarding council tax, housing benefit and a carer’s bill for his mother at the property address, in writing, using his name. They offered their condolences in one instance, displaying awareness that the resident was living at the property following his mother’s death. The death would have been noted and council tax and housing benefit accounts adjusted accordingly.

This impact on the resident was significant and could have been avoided had the council acted in accordance with its own policies and considered the exercise of reasonable discretion in the handling after its error and delay, according to the Ombudsman. The failings were compounded by the landlord’s poor responses and incorrect notices.

Waltham Forest also ignored the statutory provisions of the Coronavirus Act 2020, as it issued the notice to quit with just over a month’s notice period. The Act stated at this time that a minimum of four months’ notice would be required.

The Ombudsman called on the landlord to pay £4,750 in compensation, review how it communicates internally and to revise its 'actions following death of tenants’ process to prevent further serious delays.

In Case C, the Ombudsman found severe maladministration in how Waltham Forest failed to adequately deal with a resident’s reports of ASB and gang behaviour over a five-year period. It also failed to effectively respond to her subsequent request for a move.

The resident endured years of feeling unsafe in her own home, scared of what might happen to her or her young children. She suffered a significant decline in her mental wellbeing, as was evident by medical reports. Further, she suffered the upheaval of having to stay away from her home, sofa surfing and in temporary accommodation for genuine fears for her own safety.

The allegations about feeling unsafe in her home were serious and required an urgent response in accordance with the landlord’s ASB policy.

However, the landlord did not demonstrate that it took ownership of the case, referring the resident continually back to the police whilst failing itself to identify the risks presented to her through a risk assessment or agree an effective action plan. There were failures within its partnership, causing delays and culminating in an inappropriate management move, the Ombudsman said. The failures caused the resident significant distress over a prolonged period of approximately five years.

The Ombudsman called on Waltham Forest to pay £11,300 in compensation, for the chief executive to provide a written apology to the resident and for the council to review a number of policies in relation to ASB, including its training to staff on its ASB policy and procedure, with particular focus on the use of the RAM and action plans.

Richard Blakeway, Housing Ombudsman, said: “I recognise the challenges the housing crisis and resources are presenting to landlords. However, this context cannot excuse some of the failings in these cases, which led to significant impact on residents who were, in different ways, vulnerable.

“Running throughout these cases were missed opportunities by the landlord to put things right for the resident and rebuild the relationship.

“Instead, a lack of clarity around responsibilities and actions taken, or outstanding, alongside delays or poor communication compounded the issues and resulted in considerable distress to the residents."

Blakeway added: "Our recent Spotlight report on attitudes, respect and rights highlighted the need for landlords to adhere to their duties under the Equality Act 2010. One of these cases in particular shows the human impact of not doing so for landlords.

“I’d urge all landlords to take in those recommendations from the report and implement them to improve services and responses to residents.”

Waltham Forest Council insisted in its learning statement that keeping residents safe, comfortable, and secure in their homes was a top priority. The council said it appreciated that in these three cases, it did not meet the required standards, and the council apologised "unreservedly" to the residents who were affected.

“We fully accept the Housing Ombudsman’s findings. A significant service transformation programme has been underway for the past year. The learnings from these cases have been used to make sure we are listening to our residents’ voices and have informed the improvement to services that we have made," the local authority said.

It highlighted the following key improvements that had been made:

• Development of a new ASB procedure. This includes training for housing officers around risk assessments and providing residents with clear action plans that outline what steps are taken to address ASB.
• Training for staff on complaints handling.
• Reinvigoration of its Tenancy Checks programme and digitisation of its forms so residents’ data is updated straight into council systems.
• Ensuring housing teams receive and know how to action information from the ‘Tell us once’ service, reducing the administrative burden on grieving families.
• Work with contractors to ensure that they effectively and efficiently resolve repairs within resident’s homes.
• Establishment of a Damp and Mould Taskforce.

Harry Rodd