From 13 January 2026, we will no longer accept new case enquiries by email. Please use our online complaint form to bring a complaint to us. This helps us respond to you more quickly.

Need help? Other ways to contact us.

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202406860)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202406860

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

23 September 2025

 

Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration,’ for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice, or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
    1. The resident’s reports of damp and mould and the associated repairs.
    2. The resident’s complaint.

Background

  1. The resident has an assured tenancy with the landlord for a first-floor flat with 1 bedroom. There are no properties above the resident’s property.
  2. The resident told the landlord on 13 November 2023 that she had damp and mould in her property. She believed this was due to incorrectly installed guttering and a problem with the roof. On 5 December 2023 the resident’s advocate told the landlord she was supporting the resident with a complaint as she was deaf and had poor mental health. She advised that there was ongoing and unresolved water ingress to the ceiling, and the window frames were filling with water. She asked for a full report and action plan for it to address all issues.
  3. The landlord provided its stage 1 response on 14 December 2023. It confirmed that a damp and mould contractor inspected the property on 27 November 2023 and made several recommendations. As such, it arranged to inspect the windows and a crack at the rear of the property. It also arranged to investigate a leak from the loft and to repair the bathroom extractor fan. It offered £240 compensation for the inconvenience and distress caused in arranging repairs.
  4. The advocate sent several emails about the outstanding repairs to the landlord between 12 January and 22 April 2024. On 5 August, she escalated the complaint. She stated that the landlord had failed to respond to her emails and had taken no action on the housing repair issues. She said it had not informed her of what was causing the water ingress or what it was doing to resolve it.
  5. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 19 August 2024. It apologised stating it should have managed and completed repairs “more effectively and sooner.” It offered further compensation of £660 for its handling of the repairs and £60 for its complaint handling. It confirmed it had repaired the extractor fan and would commence repairs to the roof on 19 August. It said it would clean the mould at the property following this.
  6. On 16 December 2024 and 29 August 2025, the advocate told the Ombudsman the landlord had drilled holes in the window frames to let water out, but this caused further damp. She believed the compensation offered by the landlord was not sufficient due to the resident being “left” in a damp flat for 10 months.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. In correspondence with the Ombudsman, the advocate raised concerns about the repair to the extractor fan before the landlord’s final complaint response of 19 August 2024. However, there is no evidence she raised this with the landlord. She also raised concerns with the roof repairs, which it completed between the end of August and the start of September 2024. This took place after the landlord’s final complaint response.
  2. The resident has the opportunity to raise both these issues as a further complaint with the landlord. Should she be dissatisfied with its final response, she can raise this with the Ombudsman. These points will not be investigated in this report.

The resident’s reports of damp and mould and the associated repairs

  1. The landlord’s damp and mould policy confirms that once a resident reports damp and mould, it will establish if an immediate repair is required. It will raise any remedial work within 10 working days and will keep residents updated when multiple fixes are required. It will act in accordance with its repairs policy in completing any repairs, which states it will complete routine repairs within 25 working days.
  2. In the initial report of 13 November 2023 and complaint of 5 December 2023, the resident and advocate stated there was damp and mould in the living room and bedroom. They believed this was due to issues with: the level the guttering was fixed at, water ingress from the bedroom ceiling and the extractor fan. They also said the window frames were filling with water.
  3. On 27 November the landlord responded to the 13 November 2023 report from the resident. It arranged for a damp and mould specialist to complete a mould wash and preventative treatment. The specialist also investigated the causes of the issue. This was all in accordance with its damp and mould policy. The landlord was able to confirm this in its stage 1 response of 14 December. As a result, it appropriately arranged work that met the recommendations. These included:
    1. To investigate and repair a crack to the rear elevation of the property.
    2. To clean and overhaul the bathroom extractor fan.
    3. To inspect the UPVC windows.
    4. To trace a leak from the loft. Although the resident believed the leak was due to the roof, this action was in line with the recommendation. This stated the loft insulation was compromised and needed inspecting.
  4. The landlord offered compensation of £240 in its stage 1 complaint response, which it said was for the distress and inconvenience caused. This was in accordance with its compensation policy, acknowledging the impact on the resident.
  5. Following the stage 1 response, the advocate contacted the landlord several times without a reply between January and April 2024. On 5 August 2024 she escalated her complaint stating the landlord had not replied to her concerns. These included repairs to the roof, extractor fan and windows. She wanted to know what the landlord’s plans were, as it had not communicated this.
  6. The landlord’s stage 2 response of 19 August 2024 recognised it was delayed in completing repairs to the extractor fan and roof. It also said it had not appropriately communicated about appointments. It appropriately apologised for these failings. It confirmed:
    1. Its inspection of 13 February recommended repairs to the roof and scaffolding. It confirmed it was not commencing these repairs until 19 August, over 6 months later.
    2. Its inspection of 27 November 2023 recommended repairs to the extractor which it had not completed until 12 April 2024, over 5 months later.
  7. The landlord said that once it repaired the roof, it would complete a further mould clean and shield. Cleaning the mould again after the cause of the problem was resolved would be a sensible course of action. The evidence shows the landlord had also previously cleaned it in November 2023 and February 2024 in response to the resident’s reports at the time.
  8. However, the landlord had not completed further cleaning of the mould from February 2024. This was inappropriate and not in line with its previous behaviour, particularly as the resident reported mould on 2 March, 3 March and 7 June 2024. Following the roof repair on 2 September, there is no evidence of further reports of damp and mould.
  9. In April 2024, the advocate said the landlord had drilled holes in the window frames to dispel water, but this action caused further damp. Furthermore, in April, the advocate said an operative was unable to fit trickle vents to the window as they were the wrong size. She said they never returned to complete this. The landlord did not discuss these issues in its stage 2 response, leaving the concerns about the windows unresolved.
  10. The advocate raised the vulnerabilities of the resident throughout the complaint, stating she was deaf and had ongoing mental health issues worsened by the situation at her property. The landlord’s website says it will support vulnerable residents, so it can recognise where they may need extra help. There is no evidence of it offering additional support to the resident, or at least asking her what support she might find beneficial.
  11. On 27 July 2023, the Ombudsman published a special report on the landlord. This concluded that vulnerable residents were faced with excessive delays in repairs, poor complaint handling and confused communication. This was evident in the resident’s complaint. The landlord confirmed it was taking steps to address this, implementing a new system in April 2024 to capture and record information and would be training staff.
  12. The landlord’s stage 2 compensation offer acknowledged the impact the delays, distress and inconvenience had on the resident’s vulnerabilities. This was regarding the roof and extractor fan repairs only. It offered £600 for this and a further £60 for the time and effort to resolve the complaint. Its compensation offer did not acknowledge the full impact on the resident, including its lack of support to her.
  13. In summary, the landlord took appropriate initial steps to investigate the root cause of the damp and mould at the property and arranged further investigatory works and repairs. Following this, it did not complete repairs to the roof or extractor fan for an extended period. It did apologise for this and offer compensation for the impact on the resident’s vulnerabilities. However, it did not clean the mould at the property whilst repairs were pending. It did not respond to the resident’s concerns about the windows and did not consider its failure to offer support for the resident’s vulnerabilities.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy defines a complaint as an expression of dissatisfaction, however made, about the standard of service or lack of action by the landlord. If a complainant is dissatisfied with a stage 1 decision and asks the landlord to escalate, it will do so. It will acknowledge and log complaints within 5 working days. It responds to stage 1 complaints in 10 working days and stage 2 complaints in 20 working days.
  2. The resident initially raised her dissatisfaction with issues at her property on 13 November 2023. The landlord did not reply to this, or log and acknowledge the complaint as its policy states it should. The advocate raised a further complaint on 5 December. The landlord said its 14 December stage 1 reply was its acknowledgement and response. This exceeded the timescale for acknowledgement by 2 working days.
  3. The advocate raised her dissatisfaction with the landlord not completing the actions it had promised at stage 1. She did this on 12 January 2024, 26 January, 3 March and 22 April. The landlord failed to appropriately reply and did not log these as complaint escalations. This was not in accordance with the Complaint Handling Code. This states that if all or part of the complaint is not resolved to satisfaction, it must be progressed to stage 2 of the complaint procedure. Its failure to recognise the issues prolonged resolution.
  4. In its stage 2 complaint response of 19 August 2024, the landlord offered £60 compensation for its complaint handling. It did not clarify specifically what this was for. Moreover, its response did not mention any of the failings detailed in this report. Therefore, the award is not proportionate to the failings identified.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould and the associated repairs.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in respect of the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

  1. In light of the failings found in this report, the landlord must pay the resident £1400 within 4 weeks of this report. This comprises:
    1. £300 for its failure to respond to concerns about the windows, its failure to clean and protect against mould between February and August 2024 and its failure to consider or offer support for the resident’s vulnerabilities throughout the complaint.
    2. £100 for its complaint handling failures.
    3. £1000 it previously offered to the resident, made up of £240 on 14 December 2023 and £660 on 19 August 2024.
  2. The landlord did not respond to the resident’s concerns about the windows, which was a failing. In light of this, within 8 weeks of this report it must provide evidence it has taken all reasonable steps to inspect the windows, using a suitably qualified person.
  3. Evidence of the above orders must be provided by the respective deadlines.
  4. As explained above, if the resident has concerns about the quality of the work to repair the roof and extractor fan, she has the option to raise a new complaint with the landlord.