We are updating our systems this weekend. You will be unable to submit an online complaint form from Friday 3 April until Monday 6 April.

Normal services will resume on Tuesday 7 April.

Thank you for your patience.

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202413622)

Back to Top

A blue and grey text AI-generated content may be incorrect.

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202413622

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

4 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 the resident’s reports of a leak from the boiler and the associated remedial repairs.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, which is a housing association. The property is a 2-bedroom flat.
  2. The resident reported issues with a leak coming from the boiler and damage to the carpet in the property on 17 May 2023. He also reported there was a lack of hot water in the property during this period. The landlord arranged for its contractor to attend the property on 28 May 2023. They attended and completed repairs to the boiler, restoring hot water in the property and resolving the leak.
  3. The resident made a stage 1 complaint to the landlord on 15 April 2024. He told the landlord he was unhappy with its handling of the repair. He said the leak had left him and his family without hot water for multiple weeks and the issue had caused an increase in his electricity costs. He also said the carpet was damaged as a result of the leak and mould and damp had begun to form. He said he wanted the landlord to offer a minimum amount of £700 compensation for the distress and discomfort caused.
  4. The landlord provided the resident with a stage 1 complaint response on 17 April 2024. It acknowledged the delays in completing repairs to the boiler and replacing the carpet. It offered the resident £170 in compensation for the inconvenience caused, the time and effort spent by the resident chasing updates on the matter and also for the loss of hot water in the property.
  5. The resident was dissatisfied with the landlord’s complaint response. The resident told the landlord on 17 April 2024 that, given the amount of pain and distressed caused by the issues, he was not happy with the level of compensation offered by the landlord. The landlord reviewed its compensation offer and contacted the resident on 4 June 2024. The landlord amended its stage 1 offer to a total of £220 compensation. The resident was still unhappy with this offer and asked for his complaint to be escalated on 5 June 2024.
  6. The landlord issued a stage 2 complaint response on 27 June 2024. It said it had reviewed the resident’s escalation request and the events leading up to the complaint being made. The landlord told the resident it had further acknowledged the stress caused as a result of the delays and it had taken into account that there were young children into the property. The landlord offered the resident a total of £460 compensation which it said took into account the distress, inconvenience, time and effort spent by the resident chasing and the loss of hot water in the property. The landlord confirmed this was its final decision.
  7. The resident referred his complaint to us in July 2024. He said he was unhappy with the compensation offer made by the landlord given the distress and pain experienced during the time the repairs remained unresolved.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident has advised that they would like compensation from the landlord for damage to their possessions as a result of a leak from the boiler in May 2023. We do not make findings in the same way that a court would. We do not make binding decisions on matters such as negligence or liability and we do not make orders of compensation in the way that a court may order a payment of damages. Equally, we do not look at claims the way an insurance provider would, or award financial redress for damage to items which should be covered by insurance. The role of this Service is to consider whether the landlord responded to the issue in line with policy and procedure, and whether the resident was treated fairly given all the circumstances of the case. The resident has been advised that if they are seeking damages then this part of the complaint may be better dealt with by a court or insurance claim.

The landlord’s handling of reports of a leak from the boiler and the associated remedial repairs

  1. The landlord’s repair policy states that it will aim to complete routine repairs within 25 calendar days. It also states it will aim to attend emergency repairs within 24 hours. It says the landlord is responsible for resolving leaks from its tenant’s boilers. This reflects the landlord’s obligations under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
  2. The evidence shows the resident first reported issues with the boiler on 17 May 2023. The landlord raised a work order and attended the same day. The landlord identified issues with the pressure relief valve and noted the carpet was in need of replacement due to the excessive water damage as a result of the leak. This was an appropriate first response from the landlord as it attended the property within 24 hours as per its repair policy and identified the cause of the issue.
  3. The evidence indicates the landlord contacted its contractor on 18 May 2023 in order to complete the necessary repairs. However, the evidence suggests the contractor did not attend to resolve the leak until 28 May 2023. This was 11 calendar days from when it was made aware of the issue. As this was reported as being an uncontainable leak, this would not fall under the category of a routine repair, and it would be reasonable for the landlord to have been proactive in resolving the leak within its emergency repair timeframes as set out in its repair policy. The landlord has not provided evidence which suggests it temporarily resolved or stopped the leak between these periods. Its actions were appropriate.
  4. In addition to the above, while it did resolve the uncontainable leak on 28 May 2023, its repair records indicate the landlord did not fully resolve the damage caused by the leak until 3 October 2023. We have seen the resident contacted the landlord on multiple occasions between May 2023 and June 2023 to request updates on this work. Its records indicate a contractor attended on 6 June 2023 and it was due to provide the landlord with a quote for the works due to take place. It is not clear if that happened. We have seen no evidence to suggest the landlord took any action between June and October 2023. This lack of action was not appropriate.
  5. The landlord confirmed that on 3 October 2023, it supplied and fitted a replacement carpet to resolve the issues the previous leak had caused. It also noted that it had replaced damaged skirting. These repairs were 139 calendar days from when the issue was first reported and far exceeded its 25-calendar day routine repair timescale as set out in its repair policy.
  6. Due to the landlord’s failure to prevent or temporarily resolve the uncontainable leak during the resident’s initial report, the resident reported further issues on 26 May 2023 where damp and mould had begun to form as a result of the excessive water in the carpet. From the evidence provided, between 17 May 2023 and 19 September 2024, no action was taken by the landlord to inspect, assess or address the damp and mould concerns raised by the resident. While the landlord’s damp contractor completed a damp and mould assessment of the property on 19 September 2024, the time it took to complete this was not appropriate. Given that there were young children living in the property, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to have taken a significantly more proactive approach to investigate these concerns following the initial report in May 2023. Its failure to conduct an earlier assessment of the reports of damp and mould have potentially resulted in further inconvenience and distress for the resident and his family.
  7. In its stage 1 response provided on 17 April 2024, it offered the resident a total of £170 compensation. This was subsequently increased to £220 in early June 2024.
  8. As the resident was still not satisfied with this offer, the matter was escalated to the second stage of its complaints process. In its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord acknowledged its failures in resolving the matters within its repair policy timeframes and offered the resident further compensation. This was broken down as:
    1. £20: Loss of hot water in the property.
    2. £320: Distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.
    3. £120: Time and effort spent by the resident chasing the matter.
  9. The responses and compensation offered by the landlord were mostly appropriate as it acknowledged its failures at each stage, apologised to the resident and offered the resident reasonable compensation. However, the Service has identified further failings in that the landlord did not appropriately address or inspect the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property following his reports on 26 May 2023. As there were young children in the property who are more susceptible to the effects of damp and mould, the Service would have expected the landlord to be more proactive and conduct an assessment of the property closer to the time these reports were made. From the information available, the Service has been unable to evidence any action was taken by it prior to the assessment in September 2024.
  10. While the final compensation amount of £460 fairly took into account the distress and inconvenience caused by the leak, the Service orders the landlord to pay the resident a further £150 which takes into account the likely frustration caused by its failure to assess the damp and mould reports in a timely manner.

Determination

  1. In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of a leak from the boiler and the associated remedial repairs.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Pay the resident £610 compensation (any previous compensation paid can be deducted from this amount). This is broken down as:
      1. £460: Previously offered in its stage 1 and stage 2 complaint responses for the loss of hot water, distress, inconvenience, and time and effort spent by the resident chasing the matter.
      2. £150: For the delay in conducting a damp and mould assessment of the property following the resident’s concerns first raised in May 2023.