Summary: Mr X complains about the way the Council has dealt with his complaint about damp at his privately rented property. The Ombudsman has not found fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I am calling Mr X, complains about the way the Council has dealt with his complaint about damp at his privately rented property. He says it has failed to take action to require his landlord to resolve the problem and:

• ignored public health and safety and supported the substandard condition of his accommodation;
• unlawfully demanded he allow the police to accompany Council officers on their proposed inspection of the property; and
• discriminated against him.

2. Mr X is also unhappy about references to using a contractor for the work rather than a damp-proof specialist.
3. He has told us he is unable to use the bedroom because of the damp. He is forced to sleep on a sofa which, together with the damp, is affecting his health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
5. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

How I considered this complaint

6. I have spoken to Mr X, and read the information he and the Council have provided about the complaint.
7. I invited Mr X and the Council to comment on a draft version of this decision. I considered their responses before making my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The Council’s Private Sector Housing Enforcement Policy

8. This is published on the Council’s website and sets out how it will regulate housing standards. Its duties include:

• undertaking inspections and providing guidance to ensure residential accommodation meets minimum standards; and
• taking formal action as necessary to secure compliance with minimum standards.

9. The policy says the Council wants to work with responsible landlords to raise housing standards, and prefers to give them the opportunity first, wherever possible, to investigate any reported problems. It expects landlords to undertake any necessary repairs and improvements without the need for the Council to take formal action.
10. The Council will consider formal action where:

• there is a serious risk to public health
• there is a blatant or deliberate contravention of the law
• there is a history of non- compliance, or cooperation with an informal approach is not forthcoming
• a landlord fails to take action within timescales agreed in an informal approach.

Safer Neighbourhoods Team

11. The Safer Neighbourhoods Team is a group of Met police officers based in the local area, serving the local community and working with the Council, community leaders and residents on policing priorities.

The public sector equality duty

12. Public authorities must consider how their policies and decisions affect people protected under the Equality Act 2010. This includes a requirement to have due regard to the need to eliminate unlawful discrimination.

What happened

13. Mr X is living in private rented accommodation. He has said damp appeared in the property four months after he moved there. In March 2020 he arranged for an inspection by a damp proofing specialist.
14. The company sent a copy of its report by email to Mr X and the letting agents (the agents). This said there were high damp readings at the property, the source of the damp was a breakdown in the damp course, and insufficient ventilation a contributory factor. It specified the remedial work needed and the cost.
15. On 17 March 2020 Mr X complained about the damp to the Council’s Environmental Health Team. The Council’s records say their officer tried to explain the procedure to Mr X, and they would contact the agents.
16. The Council got in touch with the agents who said Mr X had refused to allow their contractor access to the property. The agents updated the Council on 5 April. They said they had tried again to arrange an inspection but been refused access. The Council noted it appeared it could not provide any further assistance because the agents were trying to complete repairs but were not being allowed access.
17. Following further contact from Mr X, the Council told him they were continuing to liaise with the agents about the damp. The Council’s understanding at that stage was the agents would visit to assess and carry out the necessary work once the lockdown had ended and it was safe to do so.
18. The Council wrote to Mr X on 14 May. It asked him for a copy of the damp proofing specialist’s report to assist with their investigation. It said once it was deemed safe to carry out an inspection it would arrange a joint visit with the agents. In the meantime, it would be helpful if he could provide photos of the damp.
19. The Council contacted Mr X again on 10 June. It said the damp specialist report had still not been provided. It understood the agents had told him they had instructed a damp specialist contractor to assess and complete the work. And the agents had asked Mr X to arrange a convenient time for this with their contractor.
20. Mr X was not happy with the situation. On 11 June the Council’s Housing Services manager spoke with him. She said the Council would try to arrange a joint visit with a Council surveyor and the agent’s damp contractor to decide what should be done about the damp. The Council then wrote to Mr X on 30 June confirming its manager and building surveyor planned to visit his property to investigate the complaint on 15 July. The agents had been asked to arrange for their contractor to attend.
21. The Council had received many phone calls over several months from Mr X. On 9 July, its Deputy Director of Corporate Services wrote to him about its concern at the way he had spoken to officers and his use of foul and offensive language. It warned if this continued, it may no longer accept calls from him.
22. Because of its concerns about Mr X’s behaviour, the Council decided to ask the Safer Neighbourhoods Team to attend with its officers when they visited the property on 15 July. The Council’s Head of Housing wrote to Mr X on 13 July explaining why this was considered necessary. He said, in order to assist with the damp problem, it was necessary for the Council’s officers to inspect Mr X’s property and they should feel safe doing this. He agreed officers should be accompanied by police due to the concerns about Mr X’s behaviour.
23. Mr X told the Council he would not allow the police to enter his property. He also said he had planned to record the visit but his recording device was broken and repairs would take at least 14 days. He asked for the visit to be rearranged.
24. The Council confirmed its officer and building surveyor could visit to assess the dampness, accompanied by the police. Once the damp had been assessed they could take any action necessary. And it had told the agents they should give him at least 24 hours’ notice of visits, which should be made at reasonable times.

Mr X’s complaint to the Council

25. Mr X complained to the Council on 4 August. He said the Council had ignored the evidence he had provided about the damp at his property and the Environmental Health Team officers dealing with his case were racist. They were forcing police into his property without his consent.
26. The Council responded to his complaint. It included a chronology of events and said:

• it had tried to work with him to resolve the issue but he had been obstructive.
• the visit by its officer and building surveyor to determine the action necessary to resolve the damp had not gone ahead because he had objected to the police presence.
• it had asked the police to attend because of concerns about his offensive and volatile behaviour.
• it had made a further offer of an inspection visit which Mr X had not accepted.
• a visit was needed to verify and determine the extent of the damp problem before it could take any action.
• it had seen no evidence of racism in its dealings with him.

27. Mr X brought his complaint about the Council to us in September 2020.

Was there fault by the Council causing injustice?

28. In response to Mr X’s complaint, the Council contacted his landlord’s agents to find out what they doing to investigate and resolve the problem. The agents told the Council they were trying to arrange a visit to inspect the property and would then carry out any necessary work.
29. Mr X was unhappy about the agents’ proposals for arranging access, the amount of notice given and their reference to a visit by a contractor, rather a damp proof specialist. But none of this was the Council’s fault. It had worked with the agents, in accordance with its policy, and given them the opportunity to investigate the damp problem Mr X had reported.
30. When it became clear the agents and Mr X were not able to agree arrangements for an inspection by the landlord’s representative, the Council arranged for its manager and building surveyor to visit to determine the extent of the damp and the action necessary to resolve this. It had not, at this stage, been provided with the damp proof specialist report obtained by Mr X, or any photographs of the damp. I do not consider the Council was able to make a decision about any further action required until it had been able to complete its own inspection of the problem.
31. The inspection arranged by the Council for 15 July 2020 did not take place. I do not consider this was the Council’s fault. Mr X told it he wanted to record the visit, his recording device was being repaired and asked for the inspection to be postponed.
32. The Council were unable to arrange another inspection because Mr X would not allow police to accompany the Council’s officers on their visit. The evidence I have seen shows the Council had concerns about its officers’ safety. It decided they should be accompanied by police after considering information about the way Mr X had spoken to its staff on calls, his contact with its council tax team and behaviour at a court hearing. The Council explained the reasons for its decision to Mr X. In my view, it is not the Council’s fault it has been unable to take any further action to resolve Mr X’s complaint about the damp.
33. Only a court can find there has been a breach of human rights or the Equality Act. We can find fault if a council fails to have due regard to its public sector equality duty. I have not seen anything in the Council’s records or communications with Mr X to suggest race had an impact on the way it dealt with his complaint about damp, or that it failed to have due regard to this duty. It has acted fairly in how it has applied its private sector housing enforcement policy and provided evidence to justify the necessity of police accompaniment to visits at Mr X’s home.
34. I understand Mr X’s concern about the damp and the effect it is having on him. But, based on the evidence provided, I do not consider there has been any fault by the Council in the way it has responded to his complaint about this.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman