Summary: Miss X complained that the Council failed to resolve disrepair in her temporary accommodation, which resulted in persistent damp and mould over an extended period. The Council was at fault for delay in addressing the leak, failing to complete or clearly record remedial works, and for not reviewing the suitability of the accommodation despite reports of health concerns and property damage. These faults caused significant distress to Miss X and her family. The Council has agreed to our recommendations.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council has failed to resolve ongoing disrepair at her temporary accommodation. She says she first reported a leak in 2024, which was only partially addressed, and the problem has since continued. Miss X says the ongoing damp has worsened her son’s asthma and contributed to high electricity costs. Miss X also complains about delays in the Council’s response and seeks a remedy for financial loss, inconvenience, and the impact on her family’s health and wellbeing.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. When considering complaints we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and guidance

Repairs

7. Landlords are responsible for keeping in repair the structure and exterior of a property, and for ensuring installations for water, heating and sanitation are in working order. These duties apply to all tenancies, including temporary accommodation. (Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, section 11)
8. Landlords must carry out repairs within a reasonable time. The urgency of the repair and any impact on health or safety may affect what is considered reasonable. Where a repair affects essential facilities or living conditions, delays may amount to maladministration.

Suitability of accommodation

9. The law says councils must ensure all accommodation provided to homeless applicants is suitable for the needs of the applicant and members of their household. This duty applies to interim accommodation and accommodation provided under the main housing duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
10. Homelessness temporary accommodation must be legally suitable. (Housing Act 1996, section 206) Anyone who believes their temporary accommodation is unsuitable can ask the Council to review the accommodation’s suitability. (Housing Act 1996, section 202) If the Council’s review decides the accommodation is unsuitable, the Council must provide suitable accommodation. If the review decides the accommodation is suitable, the applicant has the right to appeal to the county court on a point of law. (Housing Act 1996, section 204)

Back to top

What happened

11. I have included a summary of some of the key events in this complaint. This is not intended to be a comprehensive account of everything that took place.
12. Ms X is housed in temporary accommodation provided by the Council under a homelessness duty. She moved into the property in August 2022. Ms X says the property has been affected by persistent water ingress, damp and mould, which she first reported in 2022. The Council says its records show the first report of disrepair in November 2023. Miss X disputes this and says she raised concerns about water damage at the property viewing in August 2022 and again immediately after moving in. She refers to email exchanges with a housing officer between 1 and 16 August 2022, which she says highlighted concerns about flooring damage, hallway walls, and the bathroom ceiling.
13. On 15 March 2024, the Council issued its Stage 1 complaint response. It confirmed the property was affected by two leaks, including one originating from the flat above. It said it had arranged inspections and repairs, including a damp and mould survey for 26 March 2024 and a mould wash to be carried out.
14. In April 2024, Ms X asked the Council to escalate her complaint to Stage 2. On 10 May 2024, the Council’s contractor completed a mould wash. Further repairs to the property above were arranged, with works scheduled to begin on 25 June and expected to conclude by 1 July 2024. The Council issued its Stage 2 complaint response on 25 June. It confirmed a compensation offer of £679 to reflect increased electricity usage from operating multiple dehumidifiers, and a further £200 for distress and inconvenience.
15. On 24 December 2024, the Council’s contractor completed further treatment in the property. On 20 June 2025, the Council’s repairs team inspected the flat above and reported no ongoing leak. The Council did not gain access to Ms X’s property at this time. Ms X confirmed on 6 July 2025 that the leak had stopped but said remedial repairs to her flat remained outstanding.
16. Throughout the period of disrepair, Ms X reported that the ceiling in the bathroom was damaged, debris had fallen into the bath, and significant mould growth was present. She ran multiple dehumidifiers to manage the damp and submitted medical evidence in December 2024 confirming her five-year-old son had a mould allergy and suffered from asthma. Ms X says the conditions in the property have affected her son’s health and caused significant financial pressure. Miss X says she provided photographs and correspondence to the Council in 2022 and engaged a professional to inspect the property in November 2022, who confirmed an ongoing leak. She also reports that the Council’s own contractors raised concerns about water damage during early visits.
17. The Council confirmed it had not carried out any remedial repairs in Ms X’s property since the leak was resolved, and that no further works were scheduled. It said Ms X was last assessed for suitability of accommodation in July 2022 and had not requested a review. It has since paid Ms X £879 in compensation.

Response to our enquiries

18. As part of my investigation, I made enquiries to the Council. Of note, it said:
• It issued a Stage 1 complaint response on 15 March 2024, acknowledging two leaks affecting the property and outlining steps taken to investigate and repair.
• A mould wash was completed on 10 May 2024. Further repairs were carried out in the flat above between 25 June and 1 July 2024.
• Gilmartins completed additional treatment in Ms X’s property on 24 December 2024.
• A further inspection on 20 June 2025 found no visible leaks from the property above. The Council did not gain access to Ms X’s flat at that time.
• Ms X confirmed on 7 July 2025 that the leak had stopped, but that damage remained.
• No remedial works have been carried out within Ms X’s flat since the leak was resolved, and no further works are currently scheduled.
• The Council offered Ms X £679 for electricity use linked to operating dehumidifiers from August 2022 to June 2024, plus £200 for delays and inconvenience. It confirmed a total award of £879 has been paid.
• The Council did not consider refunding the cost of dehumidifiers purchased by Ms X, as she did not provide proof of purchase and a dehumidifier was provided by the Repairs Team.
• A suitability assessment was last completed in July 2022. The Council said it had not reviewed the suitability of Ms X’s temporary accommodation since, nor had it received any formal request to do so.
• The Council said it had not received or considered any medical evidence relating to Ms X’s son’s health conditions.

Back to top

Analysis

Disrepair

19. The Council accepts Miss X’s property was affected by a leak from the flat above, resulting in damp, mould, and associated damage within her flat. Although the Council’s records date the first report to November 2023, Ms X consistently maintained she raised concerns about the condition of the property far earlier.
20. From March 2024 onwards, the Council took steps to inspect the property and respond to Ms X’s complaints. It arranged a damp and mould inspection, completed a mould wash in May 2024, and scheduled works to the flat above, which it said were completed by July 2024. However, its handling of the repairs was disjointed. The works were spread over many months and there is little evidence of a coordinated plan to fully resolve the problem or restore Miss X’s property to a reasonable condition.
21. The Council’s repair records show several jobs were raised at Miss X’s address, including for a mould wash, a replacement bath panel, and decorating and plumbing works. Some of these jobs show no recorded completion date. In its response to our enquiries, the Council also said it had not carried out any remedial works in Miss X’s property since the leak was resolved and that no further works were scheduled.
22. This presents an inconsistent picture. The available evidence does not clearly show whether internal remedial works were completed. If they remain outstanding, the Council should take further action to complete them. If they have already been carried out, it should ensure its records are accurate and up to date. In either case, the lack of clarity reflects poor administrative oversight.
23. While the Council has said the source of the leak was resolved in mid-2025, Miss X disputes this. She says the property remained affected by damp and mould, and she continued to rely on three dehumidifiers to manage the humidity. She also referred to advice from a Council contractor in April 2025 that a darker patch on the ceiling indicated the leak was ongoing. There remains uncertainty as to whether all sources of water ingress were fully resolved. The issue persisted for at least 18 months, from November 2023 to July 2025, during which time Ms X continued to experience damp and disruption. The Council is under a duty to ensure its temporary accommodation is kept in good repair. The time taken to identify and resolve the leak, and the failure to demonstrate that internal repairs have been completed, falls below that standard.
24. Miss X confirmed in July 2025 that the leak had stopped but said damage remained within the property. The Council has confirmed that no remedial repairs have been carried out since that date. Given the ongoing uncertainty about the condition of the property, the Council should visit the property to assess any outstanding repairs and ensure that any necessary remedial works are completed.
25. In its response to our enquiries, the Council stated it had not received any reports of disrepair concerning Miss X’s temporary accommodation. This is inconsistent with its own records, which show it responded to complaints about leaks, mould and property damage from March 2024 onwards, and issued two complaint responses acknowledging the problems. Miss X also says she was asked only to provide photos of her dehumidifiers and proof of electricity usage, which she did, and was not informed that receipts were required until much later. Miss X also provided detailed email correspondence describing the issues in her flat. The Council’s statement suggests a failure to accurately log or recognise repair reports, which further reflects poor administrative oversight.

Absence of a suitability review

26. Councils have a continuing duty to ensure temporary accommodation remains suitable for the applicant and their household. This duty applies throughout the period the accommodation is occupied.
27. Ms X raised repeated concerns about the condition of her accommodation, including water ingress, significant mould growth, falling debris, and its impact on her son’s health. These concerns were communicated directly to the Council in multiple emails and through the complaints process. In December 2024, Ms X provided medical evidence showing her son had a high-level mould allergy, which she said was exacerbated by the property’s condition.
28. Despite this, the Council did not trigger a formal review of the accommodation’s suitability. It told us the last suitability assessment took place in July 2022, before Ms X moved into the current property. It confirmed no further review had been completed and said it had not received a formal request for one.
29. While applicants may request a suitability review under section 202 of the Housing Act 1996, Councils also have an ongoing responsibility to ensure placements remain suitable. In this case, the issues raised by Ms X, particularly in relation to health and safety, medical vulnerability, and prolonged disrepair, should reasonably have prompted a reassessment.
30. As the leak has now been resolved and conditions may have improved, I cannot determine whether a formal review would have found the accommodation unsuitable at the relevant time. However, the Council’s failure to carry out a review in response to serious and sustained concerns was fault. This denied Miss X the opportunity to have the suitability of her accommodation properly considered. I have not made a finding on legal suitability, as that is a matter for the Council’s own review process or for the courts.

Financial impact and remedy

31. Ms X sought compensation for the cost of operating multiple dehumidifiers to manage persistent damp, as well as reimbursement for three large dehumidifiers she purchased herself. She also requested compensation for the disruption, inconvenience, and impact on her family’s wellbeing.
32. The Council offered a total of £879 in recognition of the disrepair. This included £679 for electricity usage from August 2022 to June 2024, and a further £200 for the distress and inconvenience caused by delays. It has confirmed this sum has been paid.
33. While the payment for electricity usage covers a significant period, the leak continued until at least June 2025, but on balance of evidence, the leak was not resolved until July 2025 when Miss X confirmed it had stopped. The Council’s compensation does not take into account energy use beyond June 2024, despite the disrepair continuing for a further year. The Council should extend its electricity-related calculation to cover the full period of disruption.
34. The additional £200 for distress and inconvenience does not fully reflect the extent of disruption and uncertainty experienced over an 18-month period. Ms X reported ongoing leaks, damage, and significant anxiety about the safety of the ceiling. Her son’s health was also affected. Taking into account the length of the disrepair and its impact on the family, this amount is insufficient.
35. On the point of reimbursement for dehumidifiers, the Council said it did not consider this request because Ms X did not provide proof of purchase. It also noted that two dehumidifiers had already been supplied by the Repairs Team. Miss X says she was not asked to provide receipts but was instead asked to send photographs of the dehumidifiers, which she did, alongside proof of electricity usage. She says this evidence was accepted by the Council for energy reimbursement and should also be considered in relation to purchase costs. In these circumstances, I do not consider it disproportionate for the Council to decline reimbursement in the absence of receipts, especially as alternative equipment was provided. However, should Ms X now provide valid receipts, the Council should consider her request and provide a reasoned response explaining its decision.

Back to top

Agreed action

36. To remedy injustice in this complaint, and prevent similar occurrences, the Council will:
1. Recalculate the electricity-related element of the compensation using the same method already applied, but extended to cover the full period of disruption until July 2025. It should pay any additional amount owed to Miss X.
2. Invite Miss X to provide evidence for any dehumidifiers she purchased. Upon receipt of this evidence, the Council should issue a clear and reasoned decision about whether it will reimburse the costs, taking into account the circumstances of this case. The Ombudsman will not investigate the matter further if the Council provides a proportionate and reasoned response.
3. Pay Miss X an additional £500 to reflect the extended period of distress, uncertainty and inconvenience caused by disrepair lasting at least 18 months. This is in addition to the £200 already paid.
4. Arrange a site visit to Miss X’s property to assess whether any remedial works remain outstanding. The Council should then provide Miss X with a clear written plan setting out any further actions required and an estimated timeline for completion.
5. Remind relevant officers that where a household in temporary accommodation raises concerns about disrepair, health impacts, or suitability, the Council should consider whether these issues require a reassessment of suitability. Any decision not to review should be clearly documented, with reasons.
37. The Council will complete action points a to e within one month of the Ombudsman’s final decision and provide evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

38. Miss X complained that the Council failed to resolve disrepair in her temporary accommodation, which resulted in persistent damp and mould over an extended period. The Council was at fault for delay in addressing the leak, failing to complete or clearly record remedial works, and for not reviewing the suitability of the accommodation despite reports of health concerns and property damage. These faults caused significant distress to Miss X and her family. The Council has agreed to our recommendations.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman