This report is issued under s.23 of the Public Services Ombudsman (Wales) Act 2019.

We have taken steps to protect the identity of the complainant and others, as far as possible. The name of the complainant and others has been changed as well.

Ms C complained about the condition of the property she rented from Cardiff Council (“the Council”). The Ombudsman investigated whether the Council failed to respond to and act upon reports of leaks and extensive damp and mould at the property appropriately and in a timely manner. The investigation also considered whether, after the property was identified as not fit for human habitation in July 2024, the Council carried out repair works in a timely manner and made reasonable efforts to provide alternative accommodation for Ms C’s family.

The investigation identified serious service failures which had a devastating impact on Ms C and her family. The Ombudsman upheld all the complaints.

The Ombudsman found that the Council was aware of the presence of damp and mould in April 2021 and over several years Ms C had made multiple reports of a significant leak from the bathroom causing damage to the kitchen ceiling. The Council missed numerous opportunities over nearly 4 years to properly investigate and resolve the causes of the leak and the damp and mould. By March 2024 the property had fallen into an appalling state of disrepair. There were extensive patches of black mould throughout the property and large amounts of water were leaking through a gaping hole in the kitchen ceiling and cascading over live electrical fittings onto surfaces and units.

The Ombudsman found that there were further avoidable delays in arranging necessary repairs after the Council formally decided that the property was not fit for human habitation in July 2024. In addition, the process for considering whether Ms C’s family required alternative accommodation was chaotic and dysfunctional.

The Ombudsman found that the damp and mould posed significant hazards to the health of Ms C and her family, some of whom suffered from asthma. It also damaged or destroyed many of the family’s possessions. The despair of living in such poor conditions over a long period appeared to have contributed to the slow disintegration of the family unit to the point that all family members had moved out.

Ms C and 2 of her daughters spent many months living in unsuitable conditions with her elderly mother. The failure to properly consider the family’s need for alternative accommodation caused them further stress and confusion and meant they had to endure several more months without access to a home which was fit for them to live in.

The Ombudsman considered that Ms C’s experience should serve as a powerful reminder to social landlords across Wales of the potentially devastating human impacts of delayed and inadequate responses to reports of disrepair or damp and mould. The Ombudsman commended the Council’s constructive engagement with her investigation and the positive and proactive approach it had taken since May 2024 to improving the way it responds to reports of disrepair and damp and mould.

The Ombudsman made a number of recommendations, which the Council accepted:

Within 1 month:

a) Arrange for its Chief Executive to apologise to Ms C on behalf of the Council for the failings identified in this report.

b) Make a financial redress payment to Ms C of £3,000. This includes £2,000 for the serious practical and financial injustice and £1,000 for the serious emotional distress caused to Ms C and her family by the failings identified in this report.

c) Remind all employees within the Responsive Repairs Unit (“the RRU”) of the importance of treating all tenants with respect and compassion, particularly in relation to concerns about complex repairs and damp and mould.

d) Share the final report with members of its Audit and Governance Committee to enable it to monitor the progress and outcome of the recommendations below.

Within 4 months:

e) Review its Fitness for Human Habitation (“FFHH”) process to ensure that the need for a FFHH inspection is considered promptly whenever the Council becomes aware of disrepair which could potentially compromise a property’s FFHH status. The policy should also ensure that inspections specifically consider the 29 categories set out in the FFHH Regulations, and that where a property is deemed not to be FFHH, a follow-up inspection is arranged promptly once repairs are carried out.

f) Provide my office with evidence of the outcome of its review of the decant and monitoring process, along with details of progress in relation to any associated recommendations and action plans.

g) Provide my office with a detailed update on progress in relation to the action plans created during its review of the Ombudsman’s thematic report relating to disrepair and damp and mould.

h) Provide my office with a detailed update on progress in relation to each of the action plans created during the Review of the RRU, including in relation to Customer Communication and responding to complaints.

Within 6 months:

i) Carry out an audit of records held by the RRU and the Complaints Department (including councillor referrals) to identify whether other tenants may have experienced significant hardship or injustice as a result of the identified systemic problems in the RRU’s response to complex repairs and damp and mould cases. Where any such tenants are identified, the Council should provide appropriate redress in keeping with its complaint policy and with the approach I have taken in this case. In doing so it should consider making payments to reflect any damage to property, emotional distress and inconvenience caused by the failings.

j) Carry out an equality impact assessment of its repair and damp and mould policies, including revisions introduced following the Review, to ensure that responses to reports and complaints about disrepair and damp and mould are appropriately prioritised where disabled or otherwise vulnerable householders are affected.

1. The Investigation considered Ms C’s complaints that Cardiff Council (“the Council”):

• failed to respond to and act upon reports of leaks and extensive damp and mould at the property she rented from the Council (“the Property”) appropriately and in a timely manner.
• failed to carry out necessary repair works in a timely manner after it identified that the Property was not fit for human habitation in July 2024.
• failed to take reasonable steps to provide Ms C and her family with alternative accommodation after it identified that the Property was not fit for human habitation in July 2024.

2. I obtained comments and copies of relevant documents from the Council and considered those in conjunction with the evidence provided by Ms C. I have not included every detail investigated in this report, but I am satisfied that nothing of significance has been overlooked

3. Both Ms C and the Council were given the opportunity to see and comment on a draft of this report before the final version was issued.

4. The Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 (“the Act” – which came into force on 1 December 2022). Part 4 of the Act places obligations on landlords regarding the condition of the homes that they let. These include ensuring a dwelling is both in repair and fit for human habitation.

• Section 92 of the Act states that: a landlord under a secure contract must – keep in repair the structure and exterior of the dwelling.
• Section 97 of the Act states that: a landlord’s obligations under Section 92 do not arise until they become aware that repair works are necessary.
• Section 97 also states that: a landlord has complied with the obligations of Section 92 if it carries out the necessary works or repairs within a reasonable time.

5. The Renting Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) (Wales) Regulations 2022 (“the FFHH Regulations”) set out 29 matters and circumstances to which regard must be had when determining whether a property is FFHH. These include (1) damp and mould growth, (17) personal hygiene, sanitation and drainage, and (23) electrical hazards.

6. The Welsh Housing Quality Standard (“the WHQS”) 2023 (last updated in April 2024) sets out the standards expected for social housing in Wales, against which landlords are measured. This requires homes to be “free from damp”, including persistent condensation. All measures to upgrade the ventilation in a home must be taken, specifically in relation to ensuring adequate ventilation in kitchens and bathrooms.

7. Welsh Government Guidance, “Fitness of homes for human habitation: guidance for landlords” states that: where there is damp and mould growth, actions for the landlord include “properly installed baths, sinks etc., with properly installed drainage”.

8. The tenancy agreement which Ms C signed on 9 April 2018. This includes the following under “Council’s responsibilities”: “We will repair the following defects caused by fair wear and tear:…roofs, walls, ceilings (defect not decorative), window frames, external doors”. The Council’s “Customer Care Statement” provided to tenants states that the Council aims to “be welcoming, polite and helpful to our customers” and “recognise the diversity in our community and ensure that we provide for these differences”.

9. The Responsive Repairs Unit (“the RRU”) is the Council’s in-house repairs service. According to the Council’s repair policy (which was current during the period in question), the RRU aims to respond to emergency reports (repairs that pose an immediate danger to a person or where there is a serious risk of damage to the property) within 2 hours in most cases, and otherwise within 24 hours. Repairs classed as emergency include “serious leaks”. The RRU aims to respond to urgent reports (where there is no immediate risk to residents but the issue is more urgent than a routine repair) within 5 days (although the Council said in response to the investigation that this had been temporarily changed to 15 days). Routine repairs (where the resident is considered to be safe in their home) are classed as non-urgent. The Council said these are usually completed within 25 working days, but due to the high number of repairs, this has recently been changed to 45 working days.

10. The Equality Act 2010 (“the EA”) gives people, with protected characteristics, such as a disability, general protection from discrimination. In the context of Housing, the EA places landlords under a duty to make reasonable adjustments to ensure that people with disabilities are not placed at a disadvantage compared to others. This can be achieved by adapting properties to meet the needs of disabled tenants. The EA also imposes a public sector equality duty (“the equality duty”) on public bodies. The equality duty requires them to have due regard to the need to eliminate conduct prohibited by the EA, to advance equality of opportunity between people who have a protected characteristic and people who do not, and to foster good relations between those individuals. Public bodies must routinely consider each of these equality duty requirements when taking decisions, designing policies and delivering services.

11. All public bodies must comply with the Human Rights Act 1998, which incorporated the European Convention on Human Rights (“the Convention”) into UK law. Article 8 requires a public body to have not only respect for someone’s family life, but also their home. That respect, in my view, must include ensuring homes are maintained in a good state of repair, listening to occupiers when issues are raised and taking prompt action to resolve problems.

12. It is not my function to make definitive findings about whether a public body has breached an individual’s human rights by its actions (or inaction) or failed to meet its obligations under the EA. However, I may consider whether public bodies have due regard for human rights and the protection that the EA affords while they are performing their functions, when this is a relevant consideration. Accordingly, I will identify where human rights or equality provisions are engaged and comment when there is evidence that a public body has not had sufficient regard for them.

13. The Ombudsman’s Principles of Good Administration¹, issued by my predecessor, provides guidance for all public bodies in Wales to follow.

• Principle 2 is “Being Customer Focused” by dealing with people helpfully, promptly and sensitively, bearing in mind their individual circumstances.
• Principle 4 is “Acting Fairly and Proportionately” by dealing with people impartially and with respect, ensuring decisions are free from bias and have regard to individual circumstances.
• Principle 5 is “Putting Things Right” by acknowledging mistakes and taking prompt action to put things right.

Public Bodies in Wales must have regard to this guidance when discharging their functions.

14. Living in Disrepair – a thematic report about housing disrepair and damp and mould complaints to my office (“the Thematic Report”), November 2024. The Thematic Report noted the well documented link between poor housing, including homes with damp and mould, and reports of ill health. My recommendations included that landlords should ensure that all repair work orders are properly reviewed to ensure that all aspects are fully completed before they are signed off as complete. I also recommended that repeated service requests are recorded as a complaint when work has not been undertaken, following the first and second contact.

1 Principles of Good Administration – Issued under section 34 of the PSOW Act 2019

15. Ms C and her family moved into the Property in April 2018. On 3 August Ms C reported damp on the wall above the front bay window. It is not clear from the records provided by the Council what action was taken in response to this report.

16. On 12 April 2021 Ms C contacted the Council to report mould in the kitchen and damage to the ceilings in the kitchen and the living room. An RRU operative visited and raised orders to redecorate the living room ceiling “where the decoration has been damaged by a past leak”, and to clean down mould stained surfaces in the kitchen and repair and redecorate the ceiling. It was also noted that there was a need to repair areas of external render on the side elevation and replace defective slates on the front pitch The works were marked as complete on 19 April.

17. On 10 October Ms C reported a leak from the bathroom through the kitchen ceiling. An urgent repair order was raised. Ms C called for an update on 28 October as the repair was overdue. A plumber from the RRU attended on 3 November. He carried out a temporary repair to the lead pipework in the kitchen and scheduled further work to replace the pipework, noting that he could not complete the repair in the allocated time.

18. On 20 December Ms C called the Council several times reporting a leak in the bathroom which had caused the kitchen ceiling to collapse, damaging the cooker. It was noted that she had emphasised that her husband was disabled and there were 3 children (teenagers) living at the property. Two emergency repairs were raised and a plumber and a plasterer attended on the same day.

19. On 21 December an RRU officer replaced the lead pipework and confirmed to a tenancy manager that the leak had been repaired, and there was no need to arrange a decant (where tenants are provided with alternative accommodation because a safety issue has been identified within their home). The same day Ms C informed a tenancy officer that she had been told by an operative that due to her partner’s size and disability, the shower and stairs in the property were unsafe to use, because they were above the hole in the kitchen ceiling.

20. An RRU technical manager (“the Technical Manager”) carried out an inspection later that day and took photographs. He said in an internal email that he had confirmed that the stairs and ceiling were structurally sound. He said:

“there are a few things that will need to be sorted out prior to the ceiling being done as the disabled walk-in shower has evidently been installed poorly as seen in the photos and leaking and the wash hand basin is leaking…Damp issues throughout, mould on walls which I explained to [Ms C] I will get treated with antimould paint. I had to explain to her to keep as much airflow through the house etc. The daughter seemed to be the instigator and kept going on about her mental health and how the property is effecting [sic] the family and their mental health. She kept going on about how the Council need to move her out and rehouse them, etc which to me seemed to be more of what they are looking for rather than having the repairs actually carried out. I explained to her we cannot move her out due to a slight leak on her shower and because a ceiling has come down because of a different leak (now temporarily repaired and followed on to replace lead), but we will repair these problems.”

21. On 20 January 2022 Ms C reported they had no heating and hot water. A gas engineer attended the same day and reported 2 emergencies concerning an uncontainable bathroom leak and a need to make safe the electrics. A plumber attended later that day and identified another leak under the bathroom floor. They raised follow-on work to re-route the lead pipework under the floor. This was marked as complete on 29 January.

22. On 22 March Ms C chased the outstanding ceiling repairs and was told that this had been assigned to an external contractor (“the Contractor” – the Council said work can be allocated to contractors when there is a lack of resources for the works to be completed by the RRU). Ms C also asked about repairs to damaged kitchen units.

23. On 26 May Ms C reported that the work had still not been completed and there was an intermittent leak coming from the bathroom which was causing damage to the property and ceiling below. She said she had reported the problem multiple times, and that the leak comes and goes and she was unsure what was causing it. The Council’s C2C Customer Contact Department chased the matter with the RRU, who advised the job was showing as complete on their system (meaning that the work had been carried out and had not been re-allocated to a contractor). After a failed attempt to call Ms C, a technical manager raised an urgent repair to “trace and rectify leak from bathroom – ongoing issue”. An RRU operative attended on 14 June and the job was marked as complete.

24. On 18 October Ms C reported water coming through multiple areas of the kitchen ceiling causing major damp. She said the ceiling was bowing in places, had partly fallen through and looked dangerous. The problem was recorded as a leak to a water pipe from the toilet/walk-in shower. Two emergency repairs were raised to trace and rectify the leak and to make safe the kitchen ceiling. An RRU operative attended the same day and noted that the works were complete, and no follow-on works were required.

25. On 5 March 2024 Ms C reported that the walk-in shower had collapsed into the ceiling below due to an ongoing leak and that there were large holes in the ceiling. She also reported problems with the electrics following the leak and said that damp and mould had spread throughout the property. Urgent repair orders were allocated to the Contactor to renew flooring in the bathroom and renew the ceiling in the kitchen. A different contractor was tasked with installing extractor fans in the kitchen and bathroom (this was not completed until 30 October). The Council said that temporary repairs to the kitchen ceiling were carried out on 19 March. An order was raised to repair the electrics (this was completed by an RRU electrician on 8 April).

26. On 22 March an RRU technical manager carried out a damp inspection. The report noted that household members were affected by asthma and physical disabilities and noted the following:

“Living room – mould to large wall and skirting board rotten. Damage to external brickwork under bay window at front of property, likely causing water ingress… Kitchen – Damage to kitchen ceiling following leak, plaster has cracked and broken away. Signs of mould on walls next to window. Skirting board affected by leak, will need replacing…Bathroom – Signs of mould growth on ceiling. No extractor fan installed…all three bedrooms and bathroom affected by mould growth on ceilings due to roof leak…Back bedroom – mould growth on ceiling, due to roof leak. No ventilation in room. Small Front Bedroom – Signs of mould growth to walls, no ventilation in this room.”

27. The damp inspection report identified the need for a range of repairs, including an urgent repair to the roof, “due to water coming through bathroom and bedroom(s) ceiling”. These were raised as routine repairs, because the overall risk matrix score was recorded as Green (the timeframe for routine repairs at the time was 25 days).

28. On 12 April an operative from the Contractor visited to carry out a survey in relation to renewing the bathroom floor and repairing the ceiling. They noted that the kitchen ceiling was in a “very bad condition – previously repaired; however, still leaking and ruined board, needs leak fixing and ceiling repair.”

29. On 8 May a tenancy officer (“the Tenancy Officer”) visited the Property to discuss the outstanding issues. Ms C advised she had completed a 4 week notice to quit her tenancy, due to the repairs and the seriousness of the damp and mould in the property. The Tenancy Officer checked and confirmed that repair requests had been raised following the damp inspection. The next day Ms C emailed the Tenancy Officer requesting a transfer because she did not feel comfortable living in the house anymore, due to the property’s condition. The Tenancy Officer subsequently confirmed that her housing application had been updated to reflect that Ms C and her youngest daughter were the only people that required re-housing.

30. On 22 May the Council received a councillor enquiry, which included the following statement from Ms C:

“the living conditions within [the Property] have left me feeling as though my life is in jeopardy. Over the past few years, I have engaged in numerous discussions with the Council regarding the urgent need for repairs to bring the house up to acceptable living standards. Unfortunately, I have felt neglected and have received the same responses repeatedly. The state of the house has plunged myself and my children into a state of deep depression, and I am at a loss for what steps to take next. While I am aware of the current housing crisis, I am reluctant to let go of the property, but the conditions have become unbearable. I have been hospitalised due to respiratory issues caused by the pervasive dampness in my home, yet the council has failed to take any action.

Despite reaching out to my Housing Officer on multiple occasions, all I receive in return is a promise to follow up after filing a report. The word ‘report’ haunts me daily, as it seems to be the only response I receive from every engineer who inspects my home. Several engineers have visited the property, only to declare that the situation is so dire that they refuse to undertake any repairs. Their dismissive attitude and laughter as they exit the premises deeply wounds me. I am unable to have visitors or confide in anyone about my situation due to feelings of pride and shame.

I am at a loss for what steps to take next. My children are suffering in this environment, and it has taken a toll on all our mental wellbeing. My daughter’s academic performance is declining, and I firmly believe it is due to the lack of a clean, conducive space for her to study and feel at ease. My possessions have been ruined, and I lack even the basic amenities to cook for my children, as the kitchen is flooded and the electrical system is compromised.”

31. The following day an urgent order for inspection of the kitchen electrics was raised, and this was completed by an electrician on 30 May. Also on this day the Council responded to the Councillor’s enquiry. The response included an apology for delays in carrying out repairs, but only referred to repair works raised following the damp inspection in March.

32. On 31 May the electrician raised an urgent repair order for a plumber to fix the ceiling leak.

33. On 10 June an operative from the Contractor visited to repair the bathroom flooring but noted that this could not be carried out until a plumber fixed the leak first. The following day a plumber attended and noted that the leak was coming from the shower waste for the bathroom flooring, which needed replacing. They wrote: “I have tried sealing the waste to stop the leak, but it is still pouring through when in use. [Bathroom] Wet floor is too short to the wall and to the waste….new flooring and shower waste is required.”

34. On 11 June an Advocate from the Citizens Advice Bureau (“the Advocate”) complained to the Council on Ms C’s behalf about the RRU’s failure to address ongoing repair issues, and in particular the presence of damp and mould. The Advocate attached photographs and noted that these showed serious and substantial disrepair at the Property:

“there are holes in her kitchen ceiling exposing pipework and wiring. There is water running through these holes onto her electric cooker and sockets. She cannot use her kitchen at all. This property appears to be unfit for human habitation. There is damp and mould in every room in the property, holes in the walls and water damage to rooms.”

35. On 12 June an RRU plumber attended and raised repair works for the Contractor to carry out repairs to the walk-in shower (it appears that they were not aware that the Contractor already had an open job, and an operative had visited in relation to this 2 days previously).

36. An operative from the Contractor attended the Property on 19 June but did not proceed with the ceiling repairs because the kitchen cupboards and surfaces needed to be cleared. The Contractor closed the job after its operatives failed to gain access to the Property on 4 occasions between 19 and 24 June.

37. On 11 July the Advocate contacted the Council noting that the 20 working day period for a complaints response had expired. She attached further photographs and videos and said “as you can see by the photographs of the damage, this is extreme and the safety of the tenants should be considered as there is water pouring down the walls and into electrical sockets.” The photographs and videos were later shared with my office. They show:

• the presence of black mould in multiple rooms, with extensive coverage on the bathroom ceiling in particular
• large holes in the ceiling in the kitchen and what appears to be the living room
• the leak from the bathroom was causing substantial amounts of water to run over a live electrical socket in the kitchen.

38. The Council responded to Ms C’s complaint on 15 July, noting that the concerns had been passed to the Finance Team and that it would shortly start a Fitness for Human Habitation (“FFHH”) process. It apologised that an inspection in relation to roof repairs had not gone ahead for reasons which were not clear. It said that an inspection had been completed ahead of work to renew the bathroom flooring and repair the kitchen ceiling and the work would be carried out on 20 August. It said that anti-mould wash would be applied after the plastering work had been completed. It noted that inspections had taken place in relation to several other issues and that return visits had been requested.

39. On 24 July the Council wrote to Ms C stating that she had raised concerns about the fitness of her property on 17 July. It said that, following an inspection, it had concluded that the Property was not FFHH. It said “as there are already arrangements in place and you are happy to not be decanted from the property as long as the repairs are carried out as a matter of urgency, we will not decant you at this time”. The FFHH inspection report stated the reasons for the decision as “Contract holder has no showering or cooking facilities, she also suffers with asthma. There are 3 adults and 1 child aged 16 years at the property, all have to shower at their grandmother’s house”.

40. On 25 July the Advocate informed the Council that Ms C had no alternative accommodation and therefore would need to be decanted in order for the works to be completed. The same day the Council confirmed that a decant form would be completed by a technical manager. On 29 July an operative from the Contractor visited to carry out repairs to the kitchen ceiling but advised that the kitchen would need to be cleared. An operative returned the following day but closed the job due to lack of access.

41. The Council contacted the Advocate on 31 July stating that it was not feasible to arrange a decant because the medical recommendations on Ms C’s housing transfer application stated that she required a partially adapted property. Ms C and her family were taken off the immediate priority housing list.

42. On 2 August a key safe was installed at the Property to allow operatives to access the Property after Ms C advised that she was not living there during the day. The key safe code was not added to the repairs order on the Council’s system, meaning it was not communicated to any operatives who visited afterwards.

43. On 7 August the Advocate informed the Council that Ms C’s partner required an adapted property, but that he had moved out over a year ago, and she had informed Council staff of this on numerous occasions, including telling a Council officer who spoke to her about the decant. Again the Advocate urged the Council to arrange an urgent decant, given that the property had been deemed not FFHH. On 8 August, an electrician attended the Property to check the safety of electrics in the kitchen, but was unable to gain access.

44. The Complaints Team contacted the Advocate on 14 August, noting that the matter had been escalated to the Director of Adults, Housing and Communities and confirming that a manager would deal with it as a matter of priority. The following day an RRU manager visited the Property, took photos and compiled a report detailing outstanding works including mould, washing of areas in multiple rooms, and works to renew the bathroom flooring and repairs to the kitchen ceiling. He was accompanied by the RRU Plumbing Lead Operative and an RRU electrician who carried out repairs to damaged electrical sockets and completed safety checks. The electrician also carried out work to the electric shower so that it could not be used. The RRU manager noted that there was no need to decant.

45. On 19 August the Council informed the Advocate that the property did not require a decant. Between 19 and 20 August new bathroom flooring and a new shower waste was fitted and the kitchen ceiling was plaster boarded. Anti-mould treatment was applied to walls affected by damp. Repair works to the roof leak were caried out on 29 August.

46. On 3 September the Advocate complained that while some works had commenced 2 weeks previously, the toilet had been taken away and the Property had no facilities or running water. She said that it was unacceptable that Ms C had been advised that she needed to be at the property to allow access to operatives. This was despite having previously been advised that a key safe had been installed for this purpose. She said that due to the delayed repairs, Ms C was having to “sofa surf” at friends’ and relatives’ houses.

47. On 30 September Ms C complained to my office with the assistance of the Advocate. She said that the Property was still not habitable as she was unable to use her bathroom or her kitchen. She said that she and her daughter were having to sleep on the floor at her elderly mother’s house, and that she was concerned about the impact of the situation on her mother’s health. She said that she did not wish to return to the Property, because it was associated with so many upsetting and traumatic memories of living with disrepair, damp and mould over several years.

48. On 5 November outstanding works to renew damaged skirting boards and apply further anti-mould treatment were reallocated to the Contractor. These were later closed due to failures to access the property.

49. On 21 November a technical manager reported the Property was FFHH but required further work including plastering and decorative works. He confirmed that there was no leak observable from the shower to the kitchen.

50. On 17 December the Advocate provided updated photos and videos to my office. They show that a new leak was present in the kitchen, affecting the wall with the window and that water was leaking over the new extractor fan unit. In response to my Investigator’s enquiries, a technical manager visited the Property on 19 December. He advised that there were no clear leaks from any of the pipework associated with the toilet, sink or shower, but that he had been able to recreate the leak shown in the video by causing the sink to overflow.

51. On 19 December representatives of the Council met with representatives of my office to discuss the complaint. It was noted that a priority was to facilitate Ms C’s wish to move to a different property, and that Ms C’s outstanding rent arrears was the primary obstacle to this. Following the meeting, the Council made a Discretionary Housing Fund payment of £2,973 to clear Ms C’s rent arrears. Subsequently, Ms C was able to take up an offer for a 2-bed property with a housing association. The Council said that all repairs to the Property are now complete.

52. Ms C said that living with disrepair, damp and mould had taken a huge toll on her family. She said that the despair of living in such conditions had caused her son to become depressed and had forced him to move out. She said that her husband left during this period, and that the impact of the living conditions on his quality of life as a disabled person contributed to this. She said that her middle daughter’s asthma was made worse by the extensive damp and mould and that eventually she and both her daughters had to move out to live with her elderly mother. She said they were sleeping on the floor in a single bedroom and it was obvious that this was putting great strain on her mother.

53. Ms C said that all she wanted was to live somewhere that felt like a home. She said that the Council’s repeated failure to fix the problems made her feel like she did not exist.

54. Ms C said that when she left the Property, she had nothing, because all her possessions had been ruined by the damp over several years. She said that she had to throw away multiple items of furniture and clothing, including shoes and trainers she bought for her children. She said she had also had to throw away kitchen appliances that had been damaged by water leaking through the ceiling.

55. The Council provided a detailed and lengthy response to this investigation.

56. The Council acknowledged that it missed several opportunities to prevent the deterioration of the Property. It said that leaks had been identified from the pipework under the bathroom floor in January 2022, following the first report of a leak from Ms C in December 2021. It said that an initial patch repair was applied, and operatives were scheduled to return within 5 days to complete the repair, but this did not happen.

57. The Council said the repairs in respect of the leak were marked as complete on its system on the basis that they would be carried by a contractor. It said that normally this work would have been completed within a reasonable timescale. However, as a result of the very high level of work being received at the time, it was not possible to issue all works to a contractor and these repairs became “unallocated work”. It said that due to the level of unallocated work there was then a significant delay in issuing the work to a contractor. It said that there were numerous reasons for the high level of work including pent-up demand after the COVID-19 pandemic together with increased demand in certain areas including damp and mould. It also said that national issues with recruiting tradespeople were affecting RRU and its contractors.

58. The Council said that additional contractor capacity was commissioned in March 2024 to help clear the backlog of works and that progress was made in clearing the backlog. However, due to the high level of incoming work, by May 2024 there were still more than 5000 unallocated works with 1357 urgent repairs included within this number. It said that this level of work resulted in its scheduling systems being overwhelmed. While emergency jobs were always booked in the same day – urgent jobs were not always correctly prioritised. It said that operatives’ diaries were full, preventing the scheduling of new jobs. It said that contractors were already taking additional works and did not have capacity to take more.

59. The Council said that the work needed to remedy the situation remained in the backlog. It said that water was going outside the sink, down the wall and onto the bathroom floor. Splits in the welding in the shower then caused the water to cascade underneath. It said that although it had identified the issue, it did not address it, resulting in the ceiling collapse, call-outs for electrics, issues with heating and hot water and creating damp and mould at the property. The Council acknowledged that this was substandard service which was unacceptable and which fell below its expected customer service standards. For this, the Council offered a full and sincere apology to Ms C for any distress and inconvenience this has caused her and her family.

60. The Council said that poor communication contributed to the delays in Ms C’s case. It said that, in addition to the systemic problems referred to above, there had been indecision and confusion regarding whether the repair work would remain in-house or be out-sourced to contactors. It said that to address this, it has created a list of repairs by trade, including damp cases, that should be assigned to contractors to avoid this kind of indecision in the future. This is reviewed weekly at a senior level to ensure that prompt decisions can be made about any changes to allocation. For properties that require more complex or significant work, cases will be outsourced to contractors at the earliest stage, ensuring effective communication between the officers and the contractors so that this work is carried out as a case rather than individual repairs. The Council said that by ensuring that scheduling and technical staff all understand which repairs are allocated to contractors and which repairs stay in-house, it could avoid delays.

61. The Council also acknowledged examples of poor communication which contributed to further delays in 2024. It said that the Contractor’s operative who visited on 12 April referred to the ceiling issue as “very bad” but there was no record that this information was passed to the Council at the time. It said that a reminder has been issued to all operatives of the importance of passing such information on to a technical manager so that action can be taken. It said this is regularly discussed in team meetings and with contractors. It also said that contractors were not informed that Ms C was not staying at the property during the day due to repair issues and the key safe access code was not communicated. This led to contractors recording no access visits. It said that a written instruction has been given to all relevant staff to ensure that key safe codes are included in all repair orders relating to that property.

62. The Council said that following a comprehensive damp and mould review it had put in place a Damp and Mould Policy, and introduced thorough “whole-house” damp inspections for each report of damp and mould, with actions prioritised on the basis of a risk matrix. It said that with regard to the damp inspection at the Property in March 2024, the risk matrix should have been scored as amber (urgent) due to the extent of the damp and mould in the property (damp and mould affecting most rooms) and the health conditions noted on the damp inspection form. Instead it was scored green, which resulted in the repairs being marked as routine. It said that this has been discussed with the Technical Manager who conducted the damp inspection. It said that in recognition of the need to ensure greater proficiency, it would improve the training for all new technical managers on damp inspections.

63. The Council acknowledged that there were unacceptable delays in conducting damp inspections and assigning subsequent work. It said that in May 2024 it reviewed and updated its process for scheduling and categorising damp inspections. Now, at the initial contact from the tenant, it determines if an inspection is needed immediately (within 24 hours) or can be carried out within urgent or routine timescales. All damp inspections are scheduled through the diary system, with red, amber or green priority, and an appointment being made at first contact with the tenant. It said that its C2C agents can now access up to 2 years of repairs history to help them identify where similar repairs are being repeatedly reported and escalate this to a technical manager. It said this has resulted in greater transparency and improved customer service.

64. The Council said that when tenants report certain categories of repair, the C2C agents are prompted to ask whether there are any special circumstances, including disabilities. Answering “yes” to this will prompt the repair to be allocated as an emergency. It said the C2C system does not retain the answers Ms C gave at the time when she reported leaks at her home on 16/09/2021, 20/12/2021, 20/01/2022 and 18/10/2022. It said that as reports of leaks are categorised as emergencies, Ms C’s special circumstances (regarding a disabled household member) would not have changed the repair categorisation as she was already receiving the highest priority response.

65. The Council said that Ms C’s complaint about damage to property would not fall under the Council’s Liability Claims process. However, it offered to consider a good will payment on receipt of more detailed information about what items had been damaged.

66. The Council said that in the future a case like this would be co-ordinated by its Dry Homes Team (this was introduced following the damp and mould review). It said that this Team has recently been expanded and will provide improved case management, co-ordination and customer communication for more complex repairs. It said that for properties affected by damp that require more complex or extensive work, it had also established new services with trusted contractors to address all required work comprehensively, rather than handling individual repair jobs separately. It said that this “case management” approach will ensure that all the issues with a property are addressed in a properly sequenced order.

67. The Council said that a full review of the Responsive Repairs Service commenced in May 2024 (“the Review”), which examined all of the issues that are resulting in delays and poor customer service. The Council provided a presentation on the outcome of the Review, setting out detailed actions taken and further work needed across a range of areas including workforce management, scheduling, customer communication and complaints handling. The Review identified a range of improvements that have occurred, and improvements that are needed to the Council’s existing damp and mould policies and procedures, some of which have been mentioned above. The Council said that following the Review it was looking at procuring a new system for the RRU which would be able to flag repeated repairs and allow operatives to access a recent repair history at the property they are visiting.

68. With regard to the FFHH inspection and decant process, the Council said that when a decant is requested by any officer of the Council, its policy is to arrange a Decant Panel meeting to assess the request. The role of the Panel includes assessing the reasons for the decant including the condition of the property, the extent of the required repairs, and how long those repairs are expected to take. The Panel will consider the needs of the family and take decisions around whether emergency accommodation is needed. It said that, unfortunately, the correct process was not followed in Ms C’s case and a Decant Panel was not held.

69. The Council said that a decant was not considered necessary, taking into account that it was felt that the repairs could be carried out within a reasonable timeframe, and that its records suggested Ms C needed an adapted property which would not have been available during that time period. However, it acknowledged that the Advocate had informed the Council that Ms C had notified the Council repeatedly that she no longer required an adapted property. It also said there was a failure to monitor the progress of the repairs or to review the decant decision.

70. It said that to address these issues and prevent similar situations in the future, it would conduct a comprehensive review of the decant request and monitoring process. In advance of this it provided my office with copies of draft policy documents in relation to Decant Panel and Decant Catchup meetings which it said would:

• Make Decant Panel meetings mandatory for all decant requests.
• Ensure that the Decant Panel meetings focus on making initial decisions about whether a decant is necessary and determining the appropriate type of decant (Planned, Urgent, or Emergency) based on the urgency and nature of the safety issue.
• Ensure that decision-makers have up to date information about tenants’ housing needs, necessary support measures required and that suitable accommodation solutions are identified and implemented quickly.
• Ensure that decisions not to decant are reviewed in fortnightly decant catch-up meetings, including monitoring of progress on repairs.

71. In response to a previous version of this report the Council said that aspects of the Technical Manager’s report on 21 December 2021 were clearly inappropriate. In accepting the Ombudsman’s recommendations (see paragraph 97), it said that in relation to recommendation c) it would arrange bespoke customer service and equalities refresher training for all RRU staff. In relation to recommendation i) the Council provided a detailed initial update on progress in relation to actions identified by the Review. As part of this it said that an external provider was currently carrying out independent damp and mould surveys of Council properties. It said that 5,000 properties (36% of the total) had been carried out to date, with only 3 serious cases of damp and mould having been identified.

Ms C complained that the Council failed to respond to and act upon reports of leaks and extensive damp and mould at the property she rented from the Council (“the Property”) appropriately and in a timely manner

72. I uphold this complaint. The investigation has identified serious service failures which had a devastating impact on Ms C and her family.

73. By March 2024 the Property had fallen into an appalling state of disrepair. There were gaping holes in the kitchen ceiling through which the bathroom was visible. Large amounts of water were leaking from the bathroom and cascading over live electrical fittings and onto kitchen surfaces and units. Photos showed extensive patches of black mould in living areas and covering the bathroom ceiling. The condition of the Property at that time clearly posed significant hazards to the health of Ms C and her family, some of whom suffered from asthma.

74. The condition of the Property would not have deteriorated to such an extent if the Council had not missed numerous opportunities over nearly 4 years to properly investigate and resolve the causes of the leak and the damp and mould. The Council has acknowledged that the service it provided in response to Ms C’s disrepair reports was substandard and unacceptable.

75. In April 2021 the Council was aware that there was damp and mould in the Property and damage to ceilings in the kitchen and living room but did not carry out a damp survey to investigate the causes. It was aware that the damage in the living room had been caused by a previous leak and had identified the need for repairs to the roof and to the external render on the side elevation. It does not appear that these works were completed because the same problems were identified in the damp survey in March 2024. In October 2021 Ms C reported a bathroom leak and that part of the kitchen ceiling had collapsed, suggesting that the leak was the cause of the previous damage to the kitchen ceiling.

76. The RRU’s records show that Ms C reported the same problem with the bathroom leak causing damage to the kitchen ceiling on at least 6 separate occasions between October 2021 and March 2024. The Council has acknowledged that by December 2021 it had identified the cause of the problem, yet it failed to take prompt action to resolve it. It is evident that service pressures affecting the RRU and its contractors contributed to the delays, but the RRU’s indecision, confusion and poor communication in relation to the status of the repairs was far more significant. It is likely that systemic failings in the RRU’s repair scheduling and work management system also contributed to the poor response (these are documented at length in the Review). However, I can only conclude that the main cause of such prolonged inaction was the Council’s fundamental and repeated failure to take Ms C’s concerns seriously.

77. By December 2021, the urgency of the situation should have been obvious: the Council was aware that one of the occupants was disabled and that the disrepair problems were severely impacting the family and their mental health. The Technical Manager’s report on 21 December adopted an alarmingly dismissive tone in relation to the family’s concerns for their wellbeing. It appeared to imply that Ms C and her family were exaggerating their concerns in order to obtain a transfer to a different property. I welcome the Council’s acknowledgement that this was inappropriate.

78. From Ms C’s perspective, the Council had repeatedly ignored her requests for repairs for years, and the condition of her home was sliding further and further into disrepair. The damp and mould was so bad that she felt unable to have visitors. It caused such damage that she frequently had to throw away furnishings, furniture and even clothing and shoes she bought for her children. Living in these conditions caused her family to sink into a state of despair and she was worried about the impact on her children’s wellbeing and educational attainment. During this period, her disabled partner left and two of her teenage children moved out, one having developed depression and the other as a result of worsening asthma.

79. In a statement to her Councillor, which was passed to the Council in May 2024, Ms C could not have expressed the ongoing impact of the disrepair and the urgency of the situation more clearly or more powerfully. The Council’s response to the enquiry was inadequate because it failed to acknowledge the severity of the problems and the injustice Ms C had experienced. When Ms C tried to escalate the matter via a formal complaint the following month, the Council’s response was delayed and again wholly inadequate. Ms C has explained how the repeated failure of Council staff to take her concerns seriously over several years caused her to feel as if she did not exist as far as the Council was concerned. This was in my view the most serious indictment of the Council’s failures in Ms C’s case.

80. The Council said that a failure by C2C to record special circumstances would not have changed the priority of the reports, because the leak reports were treated as emergencies. However, while RRU operatives did attend to carry out some repairs on an emergency basis, the work to resolve the underlying problem remained categorised as urgent. In any event, it is clear that Ms C had mentioned her partner’s disability to RRU staff.

81. It is also evident that, in allocating a property with an adapted walk-in shower to Ms C’s family, the Council had already recognised that a member of the family was disabled and had sought to fulfil its obligations under the EA to ensure that they were not disadvantaged or discriminated against. It is very concerning that having become aware that the adapted walk-in shower was faulty, the RRU does not appear to have had the same regard to its obligations, despite the presence of a disabled person in the property being known to staff and to the Council on a corporate level.

82. I consider that the Council should carry out an equalities impact assessment of its repairs and damp and mould policies to provide confidence that disability and other protected characteristics are duly considered by the RRU when responding to repairs. The Council should consider ways of automatically flagging up the need to consider its duties under the EA when repairs requests are received in relation to properties where the household includes a person with a disability. This is especially important when the repairs requests relate specifically to equipment which was installed to adapt a property for the needs of a disabled person.

83. I consider that the Council should have treated Ms C’s repeated service requests as a complaint (this is a common failing we have seen in housing complaints in recent years and one which is highlighted in the Thematic Report). The Councillor enquiry in 2024 was a further missed opportunity to trigger an in-depth review of Ms C’s complaints.

84. The Council has acknowledged that failings in the damp and mould survey contributed to a failure to appropriately prioritise the required works. I consider that the failure to carry out a prompt FFHH inspection was also a factor. In my view, the Council should have carried out a FFHH inspection in conjunction with the damp and mould survey. The Council said that the Contractor’s operative who visited in April 2024 should have informed it about the matter, but the dire condition of the Property was already known to the Council at the time of the damp inspection on 22 March.

85. Even when the Advocate specifically raised concerns that the Property was not FFHH in the formal complaint on 11 June and provided supporting evidence, it was not until 17 July that the FFHH inspection process was finally triggered. Given the obvious, urgent safety concerns raised by the Advocate, including in relation to electrical hazards which may have posed a threat to life, it is unacceptable that the matter was not escalated. An immediate FFHH inspection should have been carried out and an interim response provided to the Advocate to provide reassurance that the concerns had been addressed.

86. It should not be left to tenants to request a FFHH inspection in circumstances where there are reports of serious and extensive disrepair. I consider there is a need for the Council to review the operation of its FFHH inspection process to ensure that an FFHH inspection is carried out promptly when relevant concerns are raised by tenants, or by staff following property inspections.

Ms C complained that the Council failed to carry out necessary repair works in a timely manner after it identified that the Property was not fit for human habitation in July 2024

87. I uphold this complaint. The Council has acknowledged additional examples of confusion in relation to the allocation and sequencing of works, and poor communication with contractors which caused further avoidable delays after the Property was declared not FFHH on 24 July. I consider that this was a further service failure. It was not until late August that works to renew the bathroom flooring, repair the kitchen ceiling and fix the leaking roof were finally carried out. Over the next few months significant progress was made, but it was not until 21 November that the Council formally confirmed that the Property was FFHH. Many repairs remained outstanding including plastering and decorative works. The additional delays further prolonged the uncertainty for Ms C and her family. It is understandable in the circumstances and given the traumatic history, that Ms C eventually stopped visiting the Property and decided that she could not face returning to live there.

Ms C complained that the Council failed to take reasonable steps to provide alternative accommodation after it identified that the Property was not fit for human habitation in July 2024

88. I uphold this complaint. The Council has accepted that after deciding that the Property was not FFHH there was a failure to follow the formal process to consider a decant. As a result Ms C’s needs were not properly assessed or considered, and the decision not to decant was not reviewed. The Council’s approach was chaotic and dysfunctional, to the extent that it amounted to maladministration. It took repeated contacts from the Advocate for the Council to acknowledge that Ms C wanted alternative accommodation and that she did not need an adapted property. This caused further stress and confusion for Ms C and her family.

89. Ms C was advised on 24 July that the Property was not FFHH. The Council informed the Advocate on 19 August that a decant was not needed, but did not carry out a FFHH inspection to confirm that it was safe for her to remain there. Accordingly, formally, and as far as Ms C was concerned, the Property remained unfit for human habitation until 21 November. I note that the reasons given in both FFHH inspection reports when considering the FFHH status of the Property did not specifically refer to relevant categories set out in the FFHH  Regulations. In my view the lack of detail in relation to the reasoning may have contributed to the confusion that arose in relation to whether a decant was needed.

90. Prior to the FFHH inspection on 21 November, Ms C and her daughter had no reasonable option but to stay at her elderly mother’s property, despite Ms C’s concerns about the impact this was having on her. This situation could have been avoided if prompt action had been taken to provide alternative accommodation. The failure to arrange a decant meant that Ms C and her family had to endure several more months without access to a home which was fit for them to live in.

91. Article 8 of the Convention requires public bodies to have respect for the homes and family lives of individuals. Respect can include ensuring homes are maintained in a good state of repair and listening and taking appropriate action when issues arise. I consider that Article 8 was engaged by the circumstances of this complaint, because the Council failed to keep Ms C’s home in a good state of repair, and failed for several years to address serious disrepair and pervasive damp and mould within her home. These failures allowed a situation to arise in which the right of Ms C and her family to have their home and family life respected may have been compromised.

92. Sadly it is impossible to undo the serious injustices done to Ms C and her family by the failings described in this report. The impact of the ongoing disrepair for their relationships, their health and their wellbeing were far reaching. Ultimately, the problems appear to have contributed to a slow disintegration of their family unit. The recommendations below seek to achieve redress which, as far as possible, reflects and acknowledges the severity of the injustices Ms C and her family  suffered. This could not be achieved without making recommendations for financial redress. The amount I have calculated for financial redress takes into account that the Council has already made a significant discretionary payment to waive Ms C’s outstanding rent arrears.

93. I commend the Council’s detailed and considered response to this investigation. I welcome its acknowledgement that the delays in arranging repairs to the Property were unacceptable. The Council’s evidence demonstrates that it is taking the problems with the RRU service seriously. The wide-ranging action plan set out in the Review, should lead to significant improvements in the way the Council responds to complex repair cases, and in its approach to damp and mould cases more broadly. I also commend the Council’s readiness to use my recommendations as a prompt for further improvement actions, as demonstrated in its voluntary commitment to roll out bespoke customer service and equalities training.

94. The Council has also demonstrated an encouraging commitment to improving the way it communicates with tenants and responds to complaints in relation to repairs and damp and mould. This should help to avoid a repeat of the problems Ms C experienced for other Council tenants. I hope that the findings of this investigation will serve to reinforce to the Council the importance of ensuring that the improvements identified by the Review are fully implemented.

95. I particularly welcome the Council’s action to waive Ms C’s rental arrears; this meant that she was finally able to leave the Property and move on with her life. It is extremely regrettable, however, that Ms C had to complain to my office before the Council acknowledged the severity of the failings that occurred and offered to take steps to put things right for Ms C. If the Council had done these things in response to Ms C’s original complaint, she may have been able to move into a new home much sooner.

96. There is a clear public interest in making the findings of this investigation public. Ms C’s experience should serve as a powerful reminder to social landlords across Wales of the potentially devastating human impacts of delayed and inadequate responses to reports of disrepair or damp and mould. This investigation highlights the importance of taking urgent and effective action to address ongoing problems, but also of putting things right as soon as possible when it is clear that householders have suffered significant injustice. Beyond Ms C’s case, the investigation highlighted the positive and pro-active approach taken by the Council since May 2024 in response to systemic problems with its RRU service. I urge all social landlords to carefully reflect on how to improve their own repair services, drawing on Ms C’s experience, but also on the good practice identified in this report.

97. I recommend that within 1 month of the Final Report, the Council should:

a) Arrange for its Chief Executive to apologise to Ms C on behalf of the Council for the failings identified in this report.

b) Make a financial redress payment to Ms C of £3,000. This includes £2,000 for the serious practical and financial injustice and £1,000 for the serious emotional distress caused to Ms C and her family by the failings identified in this report.

c) Remind all RRU staff and operatives of the importance of treating all tenants with respect and compassion, particularly in relation to concerns about complex repairs and damp and mould.

d) Share the final report with members of its Audit and Governance Committee to enable it to monitor the progress and outcome of the recommendations below.

98. I recommend that within 4 months of the Final Report, the Council should:

e) Review its FFHH process to ensure that the need for a FFHH inspection is considered promptly whenever the Council becomes aware of disrepair which could potentially compromise a property’s FFHH status. The policy should also ensure that inspections specifically consider the 29 categories set out in the FFHH Regulations, and that where a property is deemed not to be FFHH, a follow-up inspection is arranged promptly once repairs are carried out.

f) Provide my office with evidence of the outcome of its review of the decant and monitoring process, along with details of progress in relation to any associated recommendations and action plans.

g) Provide my office with a detailed update on progress in relation to the action plans created during its review of the Thematic Report.

h) Provide my office with a detailed update on progress in relation to each of the action plans created during the Review, including in relation to Customer Communication and responding to complaints.

99. I recommend that within 6 months of the Final Report, the Council should:

i) Carry out an audit of records held by the RRU and the Complaints Department (including councillor referrals) to identify whether other tenants may have experienced significant hardship or injustice as a result of the identified systemic problems in the RRU’s response to complex repairs and damp and mould cases. Where any such tenants are identified, the Council should provide appropriate redress in keeping with its complaints policy and with the approach I have taken in this case. In doing so it should consider making payments to reflect any damage to property, emotional distress and inconvenience caused by the failings.

j) Carry out an equality impact assessment of its repair and damp and mould policies, including revisions introduced following the Review, to ensure that responses to reports and complaints about disrepair and damp and mould are appropriately prioritised where disabled or otherwise vulnerable householders are affected.

100. I am pleased to note that in commenting on the draft of this report Cardiff Council has agreed to implement these recommendations.

Michelle Morris                                                                

Ombwdsmon Gwasanaethau Cyhoeddus | Public Services Ombudsman

16 October 2025