London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202325627)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202325627

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

24 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 level of compensation offered by the landlord following bathroom repairs.

Background

2. The resident holds an assured tenancy. The property is a 1 bedroom, ground floor flat.
3. Following repairs for a leak reported in November 2022, the resident complained to the landlord in May 2023. He said a leak from above had damaged his bathroom ceiling. He said the bathroom was covered in mould, walls in multiple areas were brown and the tiles were protruding.
4. The landlord responded in May 2023. It said that repairs were raised in November 2022 to fix the leak and complete related works. It said it had raised further repairs. It apologised for the delay and said it would look into providing compensation once the repairs were completed.
5. The works were subsequently completed and the landlord offered £1400 compensation.
6. The resident escalated the complaint in January 2024. He declined the compensation as he was dissatisfied with the amount offered. He said he had been left in a property for 12 months with damp and mould in the bathroom and his health had deteriorated.
7. The landlord responded in March 2024. It reviewed the case notes of the repair history. It said that the compensation amount it had offered was fair and reasonable and was its final response.
8. The resident escalated his complaint to the Ombudsman in April 2024 because he was unhappy with the amount of compensation the landlord offered.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

9. In his complaint to the Ombudsman, the resident said that the actions of the landlord impacted his physical and mental health. He said he had never been sick before but now struggles to walk. He said he was unable to work and had lost earnings as a result.
10. The Ombudsman is unable to assess the cause of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. The resident may be able to make a personal injury claim if he considers that his health has been affected by the landlord’s actions or inaction. This is a legal process, and the resident may wish to seek legal advice if he wants to pursue this option. Because this issue is more effectively resolved and remedied through the courts it will not be considered in this report.
11. The resident has raised concerns about antisocial behaviour (ASB) in the local area. He also says he has been threatened with an eviction notice by the landlord and has mentioned new damp and mould issues which have recently occurred.
12. These were not part of the resident’s complaint to the landlord. The resident will need to raise these with them before we can potentially investigate his concerns. If, after making a formal complaint about the matter, the resident remains dissatisfied with the landlord’s actions, he has the option to ask us to start a new investigation.

The level of compensation offered by the landlord following bathroom repairs

13. In his complaint, the resident said that water had been leaking into his bathroom. He said half of the ceiling had fallen through and there were electrical problems in the room. He said that his bathroom was covered in mould and that he had reported the repairs approximately a year ago.
14. In its response, the landlord said that it had raised multiple repairs in respect of the leak above the resident’s property and the repairs to the bathroom. It said there had been difficulties in arranging a visit to inspect the bathroom and told the resident what repairs were scheduled to take place. It apologised to the resident for the delay and said that compensation would be considered once the repairs had been completed.
15. Between the first complaint response from the landlord and the resident’s escalated complaint, the resident started a legal claim about the property’s condition. As part of that claim the landlord inspected the bathroom and repair works were arranged. The landlord offered the resident compensation of £1400. The evidence shows he initially accepted the offer and the money was paid to his rent account.
16. In his escalated complaint, the resident said he no longer accepted the offer. He said the landlord had left him in a property with no electricity in the bathroom for 12 months, with damp and mould still present. He wanted the compensation offer to be increased.
17. In its response, the landlord said that it had reviewed the compensation award offered and deemed it to be fair and reasonable. The landlord calculated the compensation for the dates December 2022-December 2023 as follows –
    1. £100 – Complaint handling.
    2. £100 – Time and effort.
    3. £600 – Inconvenience (£50 per month x 12 months).
    4. £600 – Distress (£50 per month x 12 months).
18. The evidence provided by the landlord and resident supports the landlord’s decision and explanations. It shows that actions were taken to resolve the leak and associated repairs from when they were first reported in November 2022. I have not seen evidence of earlier reports in respect of the leak. A history of repairs at the property shows at least 15 repair requests being raised by the landlord, until they were completed in December 2023.
19. The repairs took almost 13 months to complete. Such a delay would have understandably caused the resident frustration and inconvenience. The landlord said it made attempts to arrange an inspection of the property, but that a suitable time could not be agreed. However, the landlord has not provided evidence to show why this was the case.
20. The landlord identified service failings in respect of how the repairs were handled. An email from the landlord to the resident in December 2023 shows that it apologised to the resident for his experience. It said that he “…should at least expect a minimum level of proactivity and attention to details being displayed especially when our customers come to us seeking help. I (the landlord) am truly sorry our evident failure to provide an acceptable standard of service.”
21. The landlord has provided evidence of the repairs being completed and signed off by both the landlord and the resident as being of a satisfactory standard. There is evidence of the resident initially accepting the compensation offered by the landlord, both personally and via his representative.
22. The landlord’s compensation policy does not set out specific amounts to offer. It says that compensation will be offered when an apology alone is not enough to recognise the impact the service loss or failure had on a resident. It says compensation will be awarded in a matter that is empathetic, fair and proportionate.
23. In this case the resident experienced disruption in using the bathroom facilities during the repairs, but there is no evidence of a total loss of the room or facilities. There is evidence that the landlord was advised by the contractor that the property was fit for habitation, and there was no requirement for the resident to vacate the property during the repairs.
24. When failures are identified, as in this case, our role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily. In considering this, we take into account whether the offer of redress was in line with our Dispute Resolution Principles: Be Fair, Put Things Right and Learn from Outcomes as well as our guidance on remedies.
25. The total amount of compensation offered by the landlord in this case was in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance for a complaint where there have been serious or significant failures in the landlord’s handling of the repairs which had a serious detrimental impact on a resident.
26. Given the landlord’s acknowledgement of its failures, its apologies, completion of the work and its reasonable compensation, the landlord’s response to the resident put things right, and reasonably remedied the complaint.

Determination

27. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation, which in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves the complaint.