London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202320263)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202320263

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

8 May 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
1. Electrical and plumbing repairs from August 2023.
2. The resident’s request for it to replace her kitchen.
3. A leak and electrical repairs in September 2024.
4. The resident’s complaints.

Background

The resident is a tenant of the landlord. She has lived in the property since 2001. The landlord said it has no recorded vulnerabilities for the resident’s household. The resident has advised that she is diabetic and has other medical conditions. We have considered 2 complaints made and addressed between August 2023 and October 2024.
The resident reported no power in the property on 29 July 2023. The landlord has reported that an operative isolated the downstairs lights and raised a follow-on work order to locate and rectify the short circuit in the downstairs light. On 2 August 2023, the resident said that the electrics had shorted again affecting her fridge and boiler. An electrician attended on the same day, made the electrics safe, and found water in the downstairs toilet light. They raised an emergency call out for a plumber to locate and trace the leak. They attended on the same day and said that, due to the condition and age of the bathroom, they would ask a surveyor to visit to assess the bathroom for replacement.
The resident raised a formal complaint on 2 August 2023 and set out the following:
1. A contractor visited in 2022 and told her the landlord needed to replace the bathroom, but she had not heard anything. She experienced electrical outages in the property which affected everything, including the fridge and hot water. An electrician visited on 29 July 2023 and said they would arrange an urgent repair, but she had not heard anything further and the electrics were out again. She explained that due to her medical conditions, she needed to keep medicine in the fridge.
2. The landlord told her it booked the job for 10 August 2023, but she could not wait that long. She called again and an electrician came and identified a leak in the downstairs bathroom light fittings. A plumber said they would ask to assess the bathroom for replacement, but there was nothing on the system showing it already recommended this. They also said they could not repair the light fitting and extractor until it fixed the leak. She was unhappy that she had lived at the property for 23 years, but it had not replaced the bathroom. She felt it had put her and her family at risk and asked that it intervene urgently.
In its stage 1 complaint response on 4 August 2023, the landlord upheld the resident’s complaint. It detailed the visits between 29 July and 2 August 2023 and apologised that she was waiting for works. It said the appointment booked for 10 August 2023 for follow-on electrical work was its earliest available appointment due to the need to allow the electrical circuits to dry. It said that if the leak was uncontainable, she should contact its repairs service. It apologised for the delays and inconvenience caused.
The resident set out her reasons for dissatisfaction between 5 and 9 August 2023 and asked the landlord to escalate the complaint. She initially detailed the impact the situation had on her mental and physical health, noting that her household was vulnerable. She said that if it could not resolve the matter quickly, it should escalate the complaint. She was unhappy with the delays, that it had ignored her, and that it had breached its obligation to keep her family safe. She said it had not addressed concerns related to it breaching article 14 of the Human Rights Act (discrimination). She maintained that a surveyor had said it needed to replace the bathroom a year prior, but it had done nothing. She wanted it to complete the bathroom replacement immediately and pay a minimum of £5,000 compensation.
Between 10 August 2023 and 13 October 2023:
1. The landlord confirmed that it had escalated the complaint on 10 August, but there were delays at stage 2 of its process due to a backlog. Its internal communication indicates that an electrical appointment took place on the same day. It explained that it would only renew a component if it was beyond repair, and arranged an inspection for 14 August.
2. The resident pursued her concerns on 18 August and detailed the impact the situation was having on her mental health. She wanted it to provide timescales for when it would replace the bathroom as it could not repair the light or fans until it did this. She added that the surveyor said they would refer her kitchen for replacement.
3. On 20 August, the landlord raised a work order to replace the extractor fans in the bathroom and toilet once it completed the bathroom repairs. On 21 August, the resident reported that the electrics had blown again. An electrician attended and found that a faulty dryer caused the electrics to trip.
4. The landlord raised a work order for an asbestos survey on 23 August. On 1 September, it told the resident that she was responsible for repairing or replacing her dryer. It added that it had booked its electrical contractor to renew the bathroom and toilet fans and repair the leak, but that it needed to complete an asbestos survey before it could carry out repairs. It booked this for 11 September – its earliest available appointment.
5. The resident reported that three operatives came on 4 September which she found intimidating. The electrician said they were only able to change 1 extractor fan and would need to put in a request for the other. She was unhappy that it only booked to change 1 fan and asked them to leave. She said it needed to change 3 fans and also reported issues with the flow of water in the sink in the upstairs bathroom.
6. The landlord apologised that 3 operatives attended and said usually 2 would visit. It said that it did not follow procedure and provided feedback to the operatives. It confirmed that the slow tap was not part of the complaint, and the resident confirmed she reported this separately.
7. The asbestos survey took place on 13 September after the contractor cancelled the initial appointment. She reported that they cut a hole in the bathroom ceiling which it needed to repair.
8. On 18 September, the landlord confirmed it was only due to replace 2 fans in the bathroom and toilet. It noted that she refused work on 4 September, but it was its protocol to fit 1 fan and return on another day to fit the second as it could not do both in a day. It was awaiting the outcome of the asbestos survey. The resident asked that it reviewed her kitchen extractor fan for replacement.
9. We contacted the landlord on 2 October and asked it to respond to the complaint by 6 November. The landlord then contacted the resident to discuss her complaint. She was unhappy with the length of time taken, that it had not fixed the extractor fans, light, and slow leak, 2 fuses were still down for safety due to the leak, and it had not told her when repairs would take place. She felt it had discriminated against her, and the situation had impacted her mental health and her family.
10. The asbestos surveyor sent their report to the landlord on 6 October. The landlord said it had passed the kitchen to its planned and programmed works team for renewal, and she could report any repairs in the meantime.
The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response on 13 October 2023. In summary:
1. It detailed previous repair appointments and arranged for a plumber to attend on 16 October 2023 as the leak was ongoing.
2. Operatives were only able to replace 1 fan on 4 September 2023 and would need to put in a request for the second fan. It confirmed that the work only related to the 2 fans in the toilet and bathroom.
3. It attended as an emergency on 21 August 2023 and found that the electrical problem was due to her faulty dryer. It did not maintain white goods and it was the resident’s responsibility not to use it or to replace it.
4. A surveyor said there was no need to replace the bathroom as it was in a serviceable condition. It apologised for any misleading communication at the time of the initial inspection. It raised a component renewal referral for the kitchen to its planned and programmed works team who would contact her to advise further.
5. It said that it could have managed the resident’s enquiries more effectively and there were delays in its response due to a backlog. It offered £792 compensation, comprised of; £10 – Right to Repair, £180 – Distress, £180 – Inconvenience, £180 – time and effort, £152 – £2 per day for outstanding repair, £50 – complaint handling, and £40 – delay in its stage 2 complaint response.
Between October 2023 and May 2024, the resident continued to pursue her concerns. In summary:
1. She reported that operatives turned up on 16 October 2023 without warning and she was not in. She maintained that it needed to change the bath and toilet as well as the sink and 3 extractor fans.
2. She attempted to escalate her complaint further and requested a meeting with the landlord’s CEO on 17 October. It confirmed that she could approach us for an independent review. She attempted to raise a further complaint on 30 October regarding the outstanding work to the bath, tiles around the bath, toilet cistern, the bathroom and toilet sinks, 3 extractor fans, light in downstairs toilet, and her kitchen replacement.
3. The landlord sent a stage 1 response on 30 October, confirming that it had booked works for the bathroom extractor and light, tiling and the sinks. The resident pursued her concerns about the ongoing leak and bath replacement, and that it had discriminated against her. It reiterated that she could approach us for an independent review.
4. The landlord raised work to repair broken tiles in the bathroom for 14 November 2023. It said the operative reported that it did not need to complete work. However, the resident said no one attended on the day. It completed separate works to the bathroom and toilet sinks on 23 November 2023 but she continued to pursue the bathroom repairs.
5. The landlord raised a work order on 30 October 2023 to repair the bathroom extractor fan and toilet light. This took place on 5 February 2024 following 3 failed appointments. The electrician fixed the toilet light and kitchen extractor fan, but not the fans in the bathroom and toilet. It submitted a variation order for the work. On 20 February 2024, it offered £200 compensation in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by the delays in completing work to the extractor fan and light. The repair records show the work as complete on 8 March 2024.
6. It raised a work order to replace the bath and toilet, check pipework, refix tiles and reseal the bath on 28 November 2023. It approved the work on 12 March 2024. The resident said work began to replace the bath on 21 March and toilet on 22 March 2024. She reported that the cistern was loose, the shower was not working, and the bath side had come away in April 2024. Repair records show the work as complete on 7 May 2024.
7. The resident pursued a timeframe and update for the kitchen replacement on at least 10 occasions. The landlord told her that its planned and programmed works team would contact her to advise further around 6 times. In March, it said that the team would contact her when it sourced a contractor, but this would depend on whether it scheduled the work for the 2024 to 2025, or 2025 to 2026 financial year. A staff member later said that it was out of their remit to decide when it would replace the kitchen, but that she could continue to report repairs to its contact centre.

Complaint 2

The landlord’s repair records show that the resident reported that the sockets, or lights were tripping the fuse board on 3 September 2024. An operative attended at 6pm and made the electrics safe. They found an uncontainable leak through the fuse board and a plumber attended to make this safe at 9pm.
The resident made a complaint on 4 September 2024. In summary:
1. She said that the toilet the landlord installed in April 2024 caused a leak. She said the first staff member she spoke to when reporting the electrical fault asked her to unplug the appliances and check the mains supply. She did not feel this was appropriate as this was dangerous and she was not an electrician. They then booked an appointment. She called to clarify that this would be after 1pm and the call failed.
2. She called again and the staff member said the job was out of hours, but she had a text confirming the appointment was for the morning. The electrician arrived at 6pm and needed to turn off the electricity. They said she would need temporary accommodation (a decant) for the night and a plumber needed to resolve the leak before they could turn the electrics on.
3. She called the landlord, who said the contractors would arrange the decant. A plumber then came to temporarily resolve the leak from the toilet. They said follow on work was needed. She added that the toilet continued to block and the bathroom sink did not drain properly. Another electrician came at around 1am but did not have the right equipment to reinstate the electrics. She called the landlord again who said they would escalate the matter and call her back, but no one did.
4. An electrician said that they could not visit before 11am and the landlord had said they would visit by 12 midday, but she still did not have full use of the electricity. She added that the property was cold, she did not sleep, and she could not afford to replace the spoiled food in her fridge and freezer. She was concerned about how her and her child would eat.
The landlord sent its stage 1 acknowledgement and decision on 5 September 2024. It upheld the complaint. It had booked a follow-on appointment for the circuit breaker that day to resolve the repair. It scheduled another appointment for the toilet on 17 September 2024 to secure the toilet and replace the connector. It said it was attempting to bring this forward.
The resident asked the landlord to escalate the complaint on the same day:
1. She wanted compensation for the stress and loss of food. She wanted it to address the specific complaint about the staff member who said contractors would arrange a decant, and the staff member who asked her to check appliances and blocked her from speaking to a manager. She also asked it to provide the call recordings.
2. She was unhappy that the landlord left her and her family without electricity for over 24 hours. She added that she felt the landlord had discriminated against her under the equality act and had breached article 8 and 14 of the human rights act. A staff member called that day to arrange another appointment for 18 September 2024 to check the damage after it resolved the leak which she found confusing.
3. She later added that the landlord subjected her to trauma. She wanted compensation for loss of food, loss of earnings for 1 and a half days, delayed responses, and discrimination from staff. She added that she still did not have a new kitchen and felt no one cared.
The landlord’s repair records indicate that it reinstated the electrics on 5 September 2024, but it needed 2 more parts to complete the work. It then attended on 17 September 2024 to secure the toilet pan to the floor and replace a connector. On 18 September 2024, it reported completing the follow-on work to the circuit board.
The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response on 3 October 2024. It said:
1. It apologised that she felt its service was not up to standard and she felt there were errors in its communication. It found that there was 1 appointment where it was not able to visit within its 24-hour target period. It said it would compensate her for this and the misinformation she reported receiving.
2. Claims for damage to personal belongings fell outside of its complaints process and she should make this via her home contents insurance or via its insurance team if she thought it was at fault. It confirmed that she could request data via a subject access request and provided contact details for the relevant team. It said that it recorded some calls. Where it recorded calls, it held these for 3 months.
3. It offered £130 compensation, comprised of £30 for her time and effort in getting the complaint resolved, £60 for its service failure, and £40 for its failure to recognise the impact due to vulnerabilities.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

The resident feels the landlord has breached her human rights and discriminated against her in its handling of her concerns. She has also noted the impact of the situation on her mental and physical health. We do not doubt her comments, but it is beyond our remit to determine the cause of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing, or award damages. We are not able to determine that the landlord discriminated against her, or breached its human rights obligations, as these are legal matters. These matters are best suited to a personal injury claim, or are for a court to decide on. We have considered the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused, and how the landlord responded to her concerns.
The resident has referenced a more recent complaint about the gas at the property. This will not form part of this investigation as the landlord needs the opportunity to respond at each stage of its complaints process before we can investigate. If she remains concerned, or has difficulty progressing the complaint, she may wish to contact us and we will be able to assist further.
We have seen evidence confirming that the resident raised concerns regarding the landlord’s handling of a leak from her toilet overflow pipe and front door, and repairs to the bathroom in 2022 which it completed in February and March 2023. Whilst the historical incidents provide contextual background to the current complaint, this assessment focusses on the more recent complaint made in August 2023 when a new leak and loss of electrics was reported.

Policies and procedures

The tenancy agreement confirms that the landlord is responsible for repairing the structure of the property, including ceilings, and installations for supplying water, electricity, and sanitation, including water pipes, bathroom fittings and electrical sockets and switches. The resident is responsible for paying ongoing rent and allowing access to the property with 24 hours notice.
The repairs policy states that the landlord attends emergency repairs within 24 hours to make safe. It aims to complete routine repairs within 25 calendar days. Where age, and wear and tear affect key components such as kitchens or bathrooms, it would replace these through a planned programme of work. Residents are responsible for repairing their own appliances and fittings.
The programmed maintenance policy confirms that the landlord completes planned programmes of work over a given financial year. This includes kitchen and bathroom replacement programmes. It would notify residents at the start of a financial year if their property is in that years programme. It does not confirm details for future years due to changes in budget and component costs.
The Decent Homes Standard sets out the expected lifetime of different components within a property. This informs a landlord’s approach to renewal or upgrade works. In houses and bungalows, the lifetime of a kitchen is 30 years, and a bathroom is 40 years. The landlord is responsible for repairing, rather than replacing, kitchens and bathrooms where they are still within their lifetime. Where items are beyond repair, or would need further repair within a 5-year period, the landlord should consider replacing these.
The landlord has a 2 stage complaints policy. At stage 1, it aimed to acknowledge a complaint and respond within 10 working days, or 20 working days where it agrees an extension. It aims to acknowledge stage 2 complaints within 2 working days, and respond within 20 working days, or 30 working days if it agrees an extension.

The landlord’s handling of electrical and plumbing repairs from August 2023

The landlord identified a slow leak from the bathroom that affected the downstairs toilet lights and extractor fans on 2 August 2023. There was a significant delay in resolving the matter, with work conducted between February and May 2024, 6 to 8 months later.
It recognised there were failings in its handling of the resident’s bathroom and electrical repairs. Within its stage 2 complaint response on 13 October 2023, it offered £702 compensation in recognition of the delays, her time and trouble, and the inconvenience caused. It also offered £200 compensation in February 2024 to recognise the impact of delays in completing the electrical work.
Our role is to consider whether the landlord’s offer of redress put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. We have addressed the reports individually below and have considered events following the stage 2 complaint response on 13 October 2023 as the leak and electrical repairs were unresolved at the time.

Electrical repairs

The resident reported having no power in the property on 29 July 2023. The landlord acted appropriately by attending within its emergency timescales and isolating the downstairs lights. It initially booked a follow-on appointment for 10 August 2023. However, the power failed again on 2 August 2023 and the resident explained that she could not wait until 10 August 2023 as she needed use of her fridge to store medication, and she could not access hot water.
The landlord acted reasonably by arranging an emergency repair on 2 August 2023. The evidence suggests that it reinstated the main electricity and isolated the downstairs toilet light due to the water in the fitting. It then said that follow-on electrical work for 10 August 2023 was its earliest available appointment, but it is unclear whether this visit happened, or what work it did at the time. We have not seen evidence to suggest that the resident was without use of power, her fridge, or boiler during this time, but the extractor fans and toilet light remained out of use.
The landlord acted reasonably by attending within its emergency timescales following the resident’s reports of a further outage on 21 August 2023. It found that her dryer was causing the faults. It acted reasonably by explaining that it was not responsible for white goods as this would fall under her responsibility as a tenant.
The landlord raised a work order on 20 August 2023 to renew the bathroom and ground floor extractor fans once it completed bathroom repairs. It booked this for 4 September 2023. The landlord’s repair records indicate both that it completed the work, and that the resident refused the work. She has shared that she felt intimidated by 3 men attending for the work. She then said she asked them to leave and was unhappy that the appointment was for only 1 fan. The landlord acted reasonably by apologising for the distress caused by 3 operatives attending. It confirmed that it did not follow its procedure and had raised this as feedback to its contractors.
It is unclear why contractors booked the appointment when the landlord had not completed work to resolve the slow leak. It also explained that, in line with its protocol, it was only able to change 1 fan on a visit and would need to reattend on a different date to replace the second fan. We have not seen evidence of this protocol or that it explained this to the resident before the appointment. It is of concern that despite the work order showing that it needed to replace 2 fans, it either did not book sufficient time for the work, resulting in a need to book another appointment, or did not proactively book both visits to avoid unnecessary inconvenience.
The resident said that it also needed to replace her kitchen extractor fan. While the kitchen extractor did not form part of the complaint or the work orders, it is of concern that the landlord has not provided evidence to show it raised work to repair or replace the kitchen extractor following the resident’s reports on 18 September 2023 that this needed to be replaced.
In its stage 2 complaint response on 13 October 2023, the landlord said that it was able to change 1 extractor fan on the first visit and would need to put in a request to replace the second fan. We have not seen evidence to confirm that the electrician completed work to a fan on the day. The resident said that she asked them to leave, and continued to report that work to 3 fans (including the kitchen) was outstanding. Despite a lack of evidence to show that it replaced the toilet fan, the landlord raised a work order on 30 October 2023 to repair the bathroom extractor fan and reinstate the light.
There were 2 failed appointments on 8 and 15 November 2023. Despite this, the landlord did not progress the work. The resident needed to spend additional time and trouble pursuing the repairs to her toilet light and fans into 2024 due to a lack of clear internal records and oversight. We also note that a visit on 1 February 2024 did not go ahead as the operative was running late. This led to a further delay until 5 February 2024.
While the operatives reinstated the toilet light on 5 February 2024, they replaced the kitchen extractor fan rather than the fan in the bathroom as instructed and had to submit a variation order for the work. The resident made the landlord aware that both the toilet and bathroom fans were outstanding on various occasions, and it could have avoided further delay by listening to her sooner. It did not report completing this until 8 March 2024, 7 months after the initial report.
The landlord acted reasonably by apologising for the delay and offering £200 compensation on 20 February 2024 to recognise the time and trouble she spent and its service failure. However, it did not adequately recognise that work was still outstanding at the time.

Leak and bathroom repairs

While we do not doubt the resident’s comments, we have not seen documentary evidence to confirm that a surveyor recommended replacing the bathroom in November 2022, and the landlord confirmed in February 2023 that it had no current plans to complete a bathroom or kitchen. However, it is evident that there were various repair issues affecting the bathroom prior to the complaint in August 2023. This included work it completed in January and February 2023 to replace the bath panel, complete tiling, and reseal the bath and toilet. We have not seen any further reports of faults with the bathroom until August 2023.
While the landlord instructed a plumber to identify the cause of the leak on 2 August 2023, it has not provided evidence to show its diagnosis, although it has referred to a slow leak. The plumber indicated that due to the age/condition of the bathroom, it should consider replacing it. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to have taken steps to investigate whether it could resolve the leak temporarily given the length of time it can take to arrange replacement works. We have not seen evidence to show that it attempted to visit to resolve the leak until 16 October 2023, following its stage 2 complaint response.
It was reasonable for the landlord to arrange a survey for 14 August 2023 to determine the nature of the work required to the bathroom. However, we have not seen that the landlord confirmed the outcome of this visit to the resident. Its internal records indicate that it identified works needed to replace the bath and toilet, ensure it sealed the pipework, refix loose tiles, and seal the bath. However, its communication with the resident was unclear.
On 1 September 2023, it told the resident that it raised a work order with its electrical contractor on 20 August 2023 to “repair the leak” in the bathroom alongside work to replace the 2 extractor fans. However, the work order raised made no reference to repairing the leak, and its records indicate that it would not book the work for the bathroom until it completed an asbestos survey. We note that the contractor cancelled the appointment scheduled for 11 September 2023 and rebooked for 13 September 2023, which the resident said caused additional inconvenience.
Despite identifying works needed to the bathroom, the landlord did not refer to these within its stage 2 complaint response on 13 October 2023, but instead said it would send a plumber on 16 October 2023. We have not seen evidence it relied on when stating that there was no need to replace the bathroom. While it had not referred the bathroom to its planned team for replacement, it is evident that it identified that it needed to replace the bath and toilet in August 2023. Its comments were likely to cause the resident considerable distress, confusion and frustration, and meant she needed to spend additional time and trouble pursuing her concerns following the complaint.
The resident said the landlord did not inform her of the appointment on 16 October 2023, but it had made her aware of this appointment within its complaint response on 13 October 2023. Any delay caused by the lack of access on the day was outside of the landlord’s control. However, she made it aware that the appointment did not go ahead and continued to request updates on the work between October 2023 and March 2024. While it separately booked works for the sinks in the bathroom and toilet on 23 November 2023, it has not provided evidence that it attempted to visit to resolve the leak or bathroom work sooner despite her requests.
The landlord booked in work for 14 November 2023 to fix broken tiles around the bath. On 15 November 2023, the landlord said that the operative reported that no work was needed. However, the resident said that no one had visited on the day, and she was at home. Despite identifying work needed to refix loose tiles in August 2023, and her concern that no one attended on 14 November 2023, the landlord did not progress this further.
The asbestos surveyor sent their report to the landlord, confirming no asbestos, on 6 October 2023.Despite this, it did not raise work to renew the bath and toilet until 28 November 2023, and there is no record of it informing the resident that it had raised the work. Its internal records show it needed to send the quote to a repair review panel on 13 December 2023 due to the cost of the work. The resident referenced a surveyor attending in December 2023 and being aware of the need for it to approve a quote but there is no evidence to suggest that it kept her updated.
The landlord did not approve the work until 12 March 2024, 3 months later. The resident reported that work began to replace the bath on 21 March 2024. However, this was 7 months after the initial survey. The landlord’s records show the work as complete as of 7 May 2024, following her reports regarding the toilet and bath.
While the landlord acknowledged delays and time and trouble the resident spent pursuing repairs in February 2024, this did not relate to the bathroom and plumbing works. Despite her requests and evident dissatisfaction, it failed to consider a new complaint about the ongoing delays or seek to put matters right. It had opportunities to raise and ask for approval for the work – at the time of both the asbestos survey and the complaint – to prevent any unnecessary delay in approving quotes. Its failure to do so, alongside a lack of clear communication to the resident, led to ongoing inconvenience and additional time and trouble.

Summary

It is evident that the resident was significantly impacted by the landlord’s handling of the electrical and plumbing repairs from August 2023. There was a significant delay in addressing the leak until 21 March 2024 when it replaced the bath. She was also without the use of her toilet light for 6 months and without use of functioning extractor fans in the bathroom and toilet for around 7 months.
The landlord’s offer of £702 compensation on 13 October 2023 went some way to put right the inconvenience caused to her at the time of its response. However, it is evident that matters remained unresolved for a further 5 to 6 months following the complaint. It offered £200 compensation in February 2024 to recognise the additional distress and inconvenience and time and trouble she experienced. However, this related to the light and fan repairs, and it did not recognise the other outstanding repairs at the time.
In addition, when the landlord provided evidence to us on 1 August 2024, it explained that it had no recorded vulnerabilities for the resident. Its records indicate that she informed it of her health, medical conditions, and vulnerabilities on several occasions throughout, and after, the complaint. It is of concern that it has not accurately recorded these in order to tailor its repairs service where needed. This indicates that it did not adequately consider the resident’s vulnerabilities when handling the repairs. We have included an order below for the landlord to contact the resident to update its records.
The landlord’s overall offer of £902 compensation is significant but does not adequately recognise the inconvenience caused by the additional delays, lack of oversight, and lack of clear communication. For this reason, we have found there has been maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the electrical and plumbing repairs from August 2023.
We order it to pay an additional £500 compensation, bringing the total to £1,402. This amount is in line with our remedies guidance which states that amounts over £1,000 should be considered where there are failings that had a considerable impact on a resident, where the failings accumulated over time, and where the landlord’s response to the failures exacerbated the situation and further undermined the landlord/tenant relationship.

The resident’s request for it to replace her kitchen

The resident did not specifically refer to her kitchen within her initial complaint on 2 August 2023. This formed part of her escalation and subsequent communication. We understand that the resident is unhappy that the landlord has not provided a timescale for when it will replace her kitchen.
The landlord has no obligation to update or replace a kitchen at the resident’s request. It should repair where needed, but kitchen upgrades are classed as improvement works. Landlords should consider the age and condition of their stock, and complete major works such as kitchen and bathroom replacements as part of a planned programme over a given financial year to make the best use of resources. It is not obliged to consider replacing the kitchen unless it was beyond repair, or approaching the end of its expected lifetime (30 years).
The resident said that staff members recommended that the landlord replace her kitchen prior to the survey in 2023. While we do not doubt the resident’s comments, we rely on documentary evidence when investigating complaints and we have not seen evidence to show that the landlord or its staff recommended that it replace the kitchen.
The resident initially asked the landlord about a kitchen replacement between September 2022 and February 2023, noting that she had been at the property for over 20 years. At the time, the landlord confirmed that there was no current plan to upgrade the kitchen, but that she could report any repair issues to its repairs centre. While she reported a leak under her kitchen sink in May 2023 which it repaired, we have not seen evidence that she raised any other repair issues affecting the kitchen at the time.
The landlord’s internal records show that it inspected the kitchen on 14 August 2023 alongside the bathroom works. The surveyor’s notes state that they told the resident that her kitchen was not due for renewal and did not need replacing. They said they could complete any necessary repairs but reported that she refused this and maintained that it should replace her kitchen They took photos and completed a component renewal form so that the component renewal team could make the decision.
It is evident that the resident had requested a timeframe for the kitchen replacement in August and September 2023. The landlord confirmed that it had passed the request to its planned and programmed works team, advising that someone from the team would contact her and that she could report any repairs to its repairs service. This was reasonable. However, it did not provide clear information about its planned work programmes, or adequately manage her expectations about when the team would contact her or complete work in its complaint response.
The lack of clarity led to the resident spending time and trouble pursuing the replacement (following the complaint) and the landlord repeatedly stating that the relevant team would contact her. The landlord did not indicate that it completed kitchen replacements as part of a programme over a given financial year until March and April 2024, where it explained that it did not know whether her kitchen would be replaced in the 2024 to 2025 financial year, or later.
The landlord’s policies confirm that it does not plan future programmes in advance due to its budget and the cost of components changing year on year. However, it should have sufficient data about its properties to be able to determine when a component would likely reach the end of its lifetime. We note the resident moved into the property in 2001, and the kitchen may not be due for replacement until 2031 in line with its lifetime.
We have found service failure by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s request that it replace her kitchen. It was reasonable for it to refer the matter to its planned works team and there is no evidence to suggest the kitchen needed to be replaced urgently. However, it could have done more to explain when the kitchen was due for renewal in line with its component lifetime, and why it did not believe this needed to be done outside of its planned programme of works.
We have ordered the landlord to pay the resident £100 compensation in recognition of the time and trouble she spent pursuing her request following the complaint due to its lack of clarity or transparency. Our remedies guidance states that amounts in this range are proportionate in cases where there has been a failing that impacted a resident, but where the failing did not significantly impact the outcome of the complaint.

A leak and electrical repairs in September 2024

It is evident that this situation caused the resident significant distress and she spent time and trouble chasing work to reinstate her electrics following a leak on 3 September 2024. It acted reasonably by temporarily resolving the leak from the toilet within its emergency timescales. The landlord’s records indicate that she was without full use of the electricity from 3 to 5 September 2024. Following the appointment on 5 September 2024 to reinstate the electrical supply, it completed follow on work to the electrics and toilet on 17 and 18 September 2024 which was within its routine repairs timescales. The landlord recognised that it did not meet its repair timescales and did not reinstate the electrics within its 24 hour target. It offered her £130 compensation in recognition of its service failure, her time and trouble, and a failure to recognise the impact on her vulnerabilities.
The landlord’s overall offer of £130 is in line with our remedies guidance which states that amounts in this range are considered proportionate in cases where a failing adversely affected a resident, but was of a short duration and did not have a permanent impact. It took reasonable steps to apologise and acknowledge the impact on her vulnerabilities and refrigerated medication. It was reasonable for it to provide its insurance information in view of the resident’s request that it replaced damaged food.
For the reasons set out above, we have found that the landlord made a reasonable offer of redress. Its offer of compensation adequately put right the impact of the delay in resolving the September 2024 electrical outage. We note that she also raised specific concerns about the interactions she had with staff members as part of the electrical outage which we have addressed as part of the landlord’s handling of the complaint below.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaints

The resident raised a complaint on 2 August 2023. The landlord issued its stage 1 acknowledgement and decision on 3 August 2023. This was within a reasonable timeframe. She asked it to escalate the complaint on 9 August 2023. It confirmed that it had done so on 10 August 2023 but explained that it was experiencing delays and could not give a timeframe for response. It did not confirm that it had escalated the complaint until 3 October 2023 following contact from us on her behalf. It provided its stage 2 complaint response on 13 October 2023. This was 47 working days after the resident’s escalation request and outside of its policy timescales.
The landlord acted appropriately by recognising the delay and the impact of this on the resident. Its overall offer of £90 compensation for this aspect of the complaint is proportionate and adequately puts right the failings it identified.
However, landlords are expected to address each aspect of a complaint. The landlord’s stage 1 response was brief. While upholding the complaint, it failed to address this in full. She also raised concern she felt it had discriminated against her and had breached article 14 of the human rights act. It did not comment on these concerns which was likely to make her feel ignored, and that it did not fully recognise the impact on her.
It was reasonable for the landlord to tell the resident that she could refer her complaint to us for review. However, it could have done more to address her concerns about its ongoing handling of works to identify learning and put matters right. We have seen evidence that she asked it to consider a new complaint about the unresolved repair issues in October and November 2023 and expressed dissatisfaction with the ongoing repair issues in December 2023 and January 2024, where she again asked it to raise a formal complaint. While it took steps to acknowledge the inconvenience, and time and trouble she experienced due to the delay in completing the light and fan repair, it would have been appropriate for it to have addressed the ongoing issues in relation to the leak and bathroom.
The landlord addressed the resident’s second complaint in line with its policy timescales at each stage. However, it did not address all aspects of the resident’s complaint. While it briefly referenced the “misinformation” she received, it did not specify what this was, address her concerns related to individual members of staff, or comment on her concerns that it did not offer a decant. The landlord had the opportunity to investigate what its staff members told the resident at the time, but it has not demonstrated that it did so, meaning that her concerns remained unresolved following the complaint.
While its stage 2 complaint response briefly recognised the impact on the resident’s vulnerabilities, it failed to address her concerns related to discrimination and obligations under Article 8 and 14 of the Human Rights Act.
While the landlord’s offer of £90 puts right the delays in its handling of the initial complaint, additional compensation is warranted for the inconvenience caused by its failure to fully address the resident’s concerns. We have found service failure in the landlord’s handling of her complaints and have included an order for additional compensation below.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of electrical and plumbing repairs from August 2023.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s request for it to replace her kitchen.
In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of reasonable redress for its handling of a leak and electrical repairs in September 2024.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s complaints.

Orders

Within 4 weeks, the landlord is to:
1. Write to the resident to apologise for the failures we identified.
2. Pay the resident an additional £750 compensation, comprised of:
  1. £500 in relation to the distress and inconvenience caused to her by the failings in its handling of the electrical and plumbing repairs from August 2023.
  2. £100 in relation to her time and trouble pursuing the kitchen replacement.
  3. £150 in recognition of her time and trouble caused by its complaint handling failures.

It should pay this directly to the resident unless she asks for this to be put on her rent account. This is in addition to the offers of £792 and £200 which the landlord paid to the resident’s rent account in October 2023 and February 2024.

Contact the resident to discuss any household vulnerabilities and update its records to ensure it can take this into account when delivering its repairs service.
Contact the resident to discuss any outstanding repairs to the kitchen and, if it has not already done so, confirm when it expects to complete her kitchen replacement.

The landlord should provide evidence of compliance within the specified timescales.

Recommendations

The landlord should pay the resident £130 as offered in its stage 2 complaint response on 3 October 2024 if it has not already done so, as our finding of reasonable redress was made on the basis that it paid this.