London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202338305)

Decision
Case ID	202338305
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	London & Quadrant Housing Trust
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	24 November 2025

Background

1. The resident lives in a top floor, 2-bedroom flat. She complained about a longstanding leak in her living room from the roof and the time it was taking the landlord to fix it. She was also concerned about damp and mould because of the leak.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. roof repairs.
   2. the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
3. We have also investigated the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Our decision (determination)

4. We found there was:
   1. Severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of roof repairs.
   2. Service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
   3. Service failure in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

The handling of the roof repairs

5. The landlord delayed erecting scaffolding, completing roof repairs and the associated internal repairs. Therefore, it failed to act in accordance with its repairs policy, taking 2 years to complete the roof repair.

The handling of damp and mould

6. The landlord failed to respond to the resident’s concerns in timely manner.

The landlord’s handling of the complaint

7. The landlord delayed in escalating the resident’s complaint. It failed to appropriately put things right when it issued its stage 2 response.

Putting things right

Where we find service failure, maladministration or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction.

Orders

Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set.

Order	What the landlord must do	Due date
1	Apology order   The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure: The apology is provided by a director. The apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 22 December 2025
2	Compensation order (based on rent) The landlord must pay the resident £1,676.95. This is based on: 10% proportion of rent between 8 November 2022 and 31 March 2023 at a rent of £152.31 (based on the Regulator’s average rent) for 143 days. 10% proportion of rent between 1 April 2023 and 31 March 2024 at a rent of £162.85 (based on the Regulator’s average rent) for 52 weeks. 10% proportion of rent between 1 April 2024 and 26 October 2024 at a rent of £175.64 (based on the Regulator’s average rent) for 208 days. This is to recognise the loss of enjoyment of the home. caused by the landlord’s handling of the roof repairs	No later than 22 December 2025
3	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £600 made up as follows: £400 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of the external and internal repairs. £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the delay in responding to the resident’s concerns about damp and mould. £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the complaint handling failures identified by this investigation. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date.	No later than 22 December 2025
4	Completing the works The landlord must take all steps to ensure the internal repairs are completed promptly and in any event by the due date. If the landlord cannot complete the works in this time, it must explain to us, by the due date: Why it cannot complete the works by the due date and provide evidence to support its reasons. It must provide a revised timescale of when it will finish the works; or Explain the steps it has taken to ensure the works were completed and provide supporting evidence. It must provide a revised timescale if it is able to or explain why it cannot.	No later than 22 December 2025
5	Learning order The landlord must review the failures identified in this report to set out what went wrong and what it will do differently. This is in relation to both its handling of the repair and the complaint. A copy of its findings should be provided to the resident and us.	No later than 15 January 2026

 

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
8 November 2022	The resident reported a leak affecting her living room ceiling. The source of the leak was believed to be the roof area.
15 and 23 November 2022	The resident reported the leak was getting worse.
23 October 2023	The resident made a complaint. She said she had reported a leak several times in 2022. However, she was concerned because the landlord had not erected any scaffolding despite saying repairs would be carried out in December 2023. She wanted the landlord to fix the roof and wanted compensation for the damage and inconvenience caused.
20 November 2023	The landlord provided its stage 1 response. In relation to the leak and roof repairs, it acknowledged there had been a significant delay arranging scaffolding. This had since been booked for 30 November 2023 and the roofers would attend on 4 December 2023. It provided details of its insurers for her to make a claim for her damaged belongings. It offered compensation of £360 comprising of: £240 for distress and inconvenience. £100 for time and effort. £20 for complaint handling.
17 December 2023	The resident escalated her complaint as the works did not take place as advised. She wanted the landlord to prioritise the repair and address the internal damage. She wanted to know why there had been delays and how it would prevent further delays. She wanted: A damp and mould inspection. More information about the insurance claim timescales. A review of the compensation offered.
15 February 2024	The resident informed us she had asked the landlord to escalate her complaint to stage 3 on 9 February 2024.
18 March 2024	We contacted the landlord and asked it to respond at stage 2 by 9 April 2024.
25 March 2024	The landlord provided its stage 2 response. It confirmed: the roof repair was booked for 30 April 2024. a damp and mould inspection had been booked, and if any was found, it would complete this work after it repaired the roof. advised the resident to make a claim through its insurers for damage to belongings. It offered a further £240 compensation, bringing the total compensation offered to £600. This was broken down as: £320 for distress and inconvenience. £100 for time and effort in chasing for updates. £100 for poor complaint handling. £80 for delay in issuing the stage 2 response.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident remained unhappy as the roof had still not been repaired. She said had not been able to use her living room for over a year and the leak continued every time it rained.
26 October 2024	The landlord repaired the roof.

 

What we found and why

The circumstances of this complaint are well known by the parties involved, so it is not necessary to detail everything that’s happened or comment on all the information we’ve reviewed. We’ve only included the key information that forms the basis of our decision of whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration.

Complaint	Handling of roof repairs
Finding	Severe maladministration

8. The resident reported a leak from her living room ceiling on 8 November 2022. As it was causing the electrics to trip, the landlord raised a priority repair and made the light safe on the same day. This was appropriate and in accordance with its repairs policy for emergency repairs.
9. The same day the landlord also raised a repair for the roof. This was also appropriate given it was considered to be the source of the leak. The notes stated it would complete this repair in 20 working days. This was in accordance with its repairs policy, and reasonable given the type of repair concerned. It is noted that the landlord’s Right to Repair policy states that leaking roofs should be repaired in 7 working days. The landlord may wish to review this policy and determine whether it aligns with the service standards it has set out elsewhere, to avoid confusion.
10. The following day it completed a water penetration repair or test. There is no further information about what was found as or what repair was done, indicating poor record keeping. As a result, we cannot conclude that it responded in an appropriate way.
11. The landlord also wrote to the resident on 8 November 2022, to advise that it had made an appointment to attend on 9 August 2023. This was 9 months away and beyond the timescale the landlord had set itself to complete the repair. It is therefore unclear why this appointment was not scheduled to take place sooner. If this was the earliest the landlord could attend, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to explain the reason for the delay and what it was going to do in the meantime to stop the situation getting worse.
12. Meanwhile, the resident chased the landlord twice in November 2022, stating the leak was getting worse. There is no evidence to show that the landlord responded to these further reports, and this was a failing.
13. The resident was subsequently informed that an appointment was booked for 4 May 2023. The records indicate this was changed to 9 August 2023 and then 10 July 2023. The reason for the changes, or whether they were communicated to the resident, is unclear. It is also unclear why the landlord did not consider expediting the repairs given that the resident had reported that the situation was worsening.
14. The evidence suggests that this appointment was for the installation of scaffolding. The scaffolding quote itself was received on 12 July 2023. It is unclear why it had taken 8 months to receive a quote. The evidence does not suggest that this was a delay that was outside of the landlord’s control.
15. After the initial quote was received, it needed to be revised to account for extra works. What this entailed, is unclear, but the landlord made a further request for a quote on 29 August 2023 and installed the scaffolding on 30 November 2023. This was approximately 1 year after the resident reported the leak. We have not seen any evidence that this delay was unavoidable, or that the landlord was transparent in its communication with the resident about what it was doing and likely timescales.
16. The evidence shows that after the resident complained on 25 October 2023, the landlord began to investigate delays with the repair. Internal communications indicate that the landlord was unsure if the scaffolding had been installed, and this is indicative of poor repairs management.
17. The landlord stated in the stage 1 response that the roof repair was booked for 4 December 2023. The repair records have no information about what happened at this visit. However, later notes suggest that the landlord attended and informed the resident that the job was not completed as it was waiting for a quote. The records lack detail as it is not clear what this quote was for. Furthermore, we have not been provided with evidence that the landlord chased for this quote and kept the resident updated.
18. In March 2024, when the landlord was preparing a stage 2 response, it again was unsure of the status of the repair. This was poor. The landlord sought clarification from the resident, and this should not have been necessary. The landlord should have systems in place that allow it to proactively monitor repairs and ensure that they are completed in a timely manner.
19. The landlord in its stage 2 response stated it would complete the repair on 30 April 2024. This was cancelled and rebooked for 13 May 2024. The reasons for the cancellation are not recorded, but there was a failure to keep an assurance that had been made, and this was inappropriate. A new scaffolding quote was uploaded on 23 September 2024, and the landlord repaired the roof on 26 October 2024. This was almost 2 years after the resident reported the leak and was an unreasonable length of time. We acknowledge that sometimes repairing a leak can take time and that the process may not always be straightforward. However, the evidence does not suggest that either the repair was complex, or there were circumstances outside the landlord’s control that prevented it from completing the repair sooner. For that reason, the time taken was unreasonable and a significant departure from policy timescales.
20. Internal repairs were required following the leak. We understand that the ceiling was boarded up and replastered in September or October 2025, which was almost 3 years after the leak. It is unclear why the internal repairs did not take place sooner after the external repairs were completed.
21. We have made a finding of severe maladministration. This is due to:
    1. the length of time taken to complete the repair.
    2. the impact of the leak on the resident.
    3. the lack of updates provided to the resident.
22. The landlord offered compensation totalling £420 for repair related failures. However, we do not consider this to be a proportionate amount for the failings identified. We have ordered a rent-based compensation order to reflect the loss of enjoyment of the resident’s living room for the almost 24 months it took to complete the repair. We have also ordered the landlord to pay further compensation of £400 to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident as a result of the landlord’s poor handling of the repair. This is an appropriate amount in line with our Remedies Guidance for failings which had a significant impact on the resident.
23. The resident has also advised that some of the internal repairs remain outstanding. We have therefore made an order in relation to this.

 

Complaint	The handling of the damp and mould
Finding	Service failure

24. The resident raised concerns about damp and mould in her complaint. While she did not state she had seen any, she was generally concerned about it due to the leak. There is no evidence she reported concerns before this. Therefore, we will take this as the first report. The landlord appropriately apologised for not investigating this sooner in its stage 1 response. It stated it would arrange the necessary remedial action and monitor it as a matter of urgency.
25. The resident raised the issue again in her escalation request and asked the landlord to complete a thorough inspection of the property. The landlord states on its website that on receipt of a report of damp and mould, its initial step is to find out what repairs are necessary to resolve the problem. It will then raise any repairs or remedial works. On receipt of the resident’s report, the landlord raised a mould wash for March 2024. The evidence suggests that this mould wash appointment was later amended to an inspection instead.
26. The landlord stated in the stage 2 response that it would arrange an inspection. It appropriately explained that if damp and mould was found, it would commence work on this after it repaired the roof. This was a reasonable approach. Internal notes show that it attempted this inspection on or around 29 April 2024, however the resident declined as she wanted the roof to be repaired first.
27. During the course of the landlord’s stage 2 investigation of the complaint, it missed the opportunity to recognise and put right its failure to follow through on its assurances at stage 1. As a result, we have found service failure. This recognises that the detriment of the failure was limited as the resident wanted to wait until the roof was repaired in any case. We also factored in that she did not observe any damp or mould in her living room. However, we note her concern was that it may be present in the attic. We will order the landlord to pay £100 compensation. This is an appropriate award in line with our remedies guidance for failings which have caused a minor impact.

 

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Service failure

28. The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (“the Code”) sets out when and how a landlord should respond to complaints. The relevant version of the Code in this case is the April 2022 edition.
29. The landlord acknowledged the complaint within 2 working days, but it issued its response 8 working days over the published timescales. We have not seen any evidence that it agreed an extension with the resident in line with the Code. However, it is positive that the landlord recognised this failing at stage 1 and offered £20 compensation to put things right.
30. The resident submitted a webform escalation request on 17 December 2023. The landlord did not consider this escalation request until we contacted it on 18 March 2024 and asked it to respond. The Code states that if all or part of the complaint is not resolved to the resident’s satisfaction at stage 1 it must be progressed to stage 2. It was a failing that this was not done. However, the landlord appropriately acknowledged the failing and offered £180 compensation. This was proportionate in the circumstances given the delay and that the resident had to contact us for assistance in progressing her complaint.
31. When the landlord was considering the complaint at stage 2, it was aware that the repair was still outstanding. While it provided an assurance about when the works were going to be completed, and offered some compensation, it would have been reasonable for it to advise that it would revisit the compensation once the works were complete. This would have demonstrated awareness that the resident was yet to be inconvenienced further, but that it was committed to putting things right. Further reassurance that it was committed to monitoring the repairs would have also been appropriate given the delays that the resident had experienced up until that time. For that reason, we have found service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling and ordered it to pay the resident a further £100.

Learning

32. The landlord should ensure it is following its policy timescales for repairs. Where it cannot due to the repair being complex in nature it should look at ways on how it can improve the resident’s overall experience.
33. Landlords should be aware of the Code and what its obligations are when a resident expresses dissatisfaction. In this case had it done this, it could have responded to the stage 2 complaint sooner, avoiding delays and the need for the resident to contact us.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

34. The landlord’s recording keeping was poor. Its management of the repair may have been improved if it had better record keeping practices.

Communication

35. The landlord’s communication for the duration of the repair was inadequate. It should consider how it can implement changes to this to provide a better service for residents who have more complex repairs.