London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202325530)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202325530

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

18 June 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:
    1. The landlord’s handling of window repairs and replacement.
    2. The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, who is a housing association. The property is a 3 bedroom, 2-storey property. The resident lives with her 3 children. She made the landlord aware throughout the complaint that her daughter had epilepsy.
  2. The resident sent a formal complaint to the landlord on 14 July 2023. She was unhappy that although the landlord’s surveyor had attended on 29 November 2022 and told her that her windows were irreparable and had to be replaced, they had not been. She stated the cold coming through the windows was affecting her daughter’s health.
  3. The landlord provided its stage 1 response on 18 July 2023 and explained that her window renewal was on its component renewal list. It advised it had contacted planning for an update but had no response as yet. It said it could not provide a timeframe until approval from planning and contractor assignment.
  4. The landlord’s contractor attended an emergency call out on 5 October 2023 as the glass in 1 of the bedroom windows had fallen out and smashed. The contractor identified the window frame was rotten and made it safe before boarding up the window and advising the resident not to use it.
  5. The resident chased the landlord’s planning department on 13 and 23 October 2023 before requesting an escalation of her complaint to stage 2 on 29 November 2023. The resident complained that the boarded-up window was letting in cold and rain. The rest of the windows remained in disrepair and were making her house cold throughout. She was unhappy with the lack of transparency and poor communication from customer services and the planning department.
  6. The landlord sent its response on 27 February 2024. It acknowledged it had spoken to the resident on 19 February 2024 following this Service’s request for escalation. The landlord apologised for the delay and advised that the replacement windows were now on its planned investment programme 24/25. The landlord explained that, while they had advised her in 2022 that she would receive replacement windows, this was part of a planned investment programme. The landlord offered the resident a total of £60 compensation, which included £40 for miscommunication and £20 for delays at stage 2.
  7. On 16 April 2024, the resident asked this Service to consider her complaint because of a boarded-up window and the landlord failing to replace her windows. This was causing her household to experience chest infections. She highlighted her daughter was more likely to become ill because of medication that reduced her immune system. The resident further wrote to inform us that the landlord had replaced the windows in October 2024, and that her child’s bedroom window had remained boarded until that time. She also stated the compensation offered at stage 2 did not reflect the increase in energy bills the boarded-up window caused.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident reported her family had experienced chest infections due to the reported windows issues making the property cold. Whilst this Service is an alternative to the courts, it is unable to establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action have had a detrimental impact on a resident’s health. Nor can it calculate or award damages. The Ombudsman is therefore unable to consider the personal injury aspects of the resident’s complaint. These matters are better suited to consideration by a court or via a personal injury claim. We have, however, considered whether any failings by the landlord have caused distress and inconvenience to the resident.

Legal and policy framework

  1. The landlord’s repairs policy states as follows:
    1. The landlord is responsible for the windows and external doors.
    2. Where age and wear and tear affect key components such as doors and windows, these will be replaced through planned programmes of work.
    3. Where a resident is vulnerable, it is able to adjust its service standards where a delay would put them at risk because of their condition.
    4. It aims to complete routine day to day repairs in an average of 25 calendar days.
    5. For emergency works, where there is an immediate danger, it will attend within 24 hours. For emergency works that occur out of hours, it will attend within 4 hours. The out of hours service will be to ‘make safe’ and lower the immediate risk. The follow-on repair will then be completed at the earliest mutually convenient appointment.
  2. The “Right to Repair” legislation covers small, urgent repairs up to the value of £250. An insecure external window or door should be repaired within 1 working day under this legislation.
  3. The landlord has a 2 stage complaints policy. At stage 1 it will respond within 10 working days. At stage 2 it will respond within 20 working days. If additional time is required at either stage, it will keep the resident informed. Additional time at either stage should not exceed a further 10 working days and the resident’s agreement is required for this.
  4. Within the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for a Component Renewal Referral it states that if an operative identifies component is unable to be economically repaired the supervisor will complete the component renewal referral form and advise the resident within 10 calendar days of the result of the inspection. The supervisor would thereafter advise the resident there was a 14-week lead time for works to commence if approved. There is no time limit provided for how long it will take for the landlord to approve the work.

The landlord’s handling of replacement windows

  1. It is not in dispute that the landlord was responsible for ensuring the windows and doors of the property were in good working order as outlined in its repairs policy. The landlord committed to undertake works to replace all the resident’s windows and front door.
  2. Following its SOP for component renewal referrals, the landlord’s supervisor attended and noted that the windows needed replacing. The landlord’s file shows a recording of this on its system on 29 November 2022. Although the resident told the Service that the landlord’s supervisor promised urgent window replacement (2023 replacement programme), the landlord’s file lacks this record.  
  3. The above SOP also states the supervisor must complete a Component Renewal Referral form. We have no evidence of this in the landlord’s file. The landlord should have been able to provide records of its decision making regarding the windows and the supervisor’s report, which it relied upon for not replacing the windows urgently. It was inappropriate that it either did not follow its own SOP or that it did not hold a record of this.
  4. As the landlord had decided the window replacement was not urgent, it should have clearly explained this to the resident, including the reasons for its decision, as per its SOP. This would have helped to manage the resident’s expectations. The Service has seen no evidence that the landlord sought to do so. This left the resident with conflicting advice from the supervisor and the landlord regarding the urgency of the window replacement. The poor communication from the landlord was unreasonable and caused the resident to chase the landlord on several occasions, which caused unnecessary frustration and distress.
  5. The landlord in its stage 1 complaint response from July 2023 told the resident that the windows were on a component renewal list and that it could not give a timeframe until the work received approval. It was inappropriate that she had been waiting since November 2022 (8 months) to be informed of this.
  6. On 5 October 2023 the landlord attended to a report of a broken window at the property. The landlord appropriately completed the repair on the same day, treating it as an emergency in line with the landlord’s repair policy and the right to repair legislation requiring immediate securing (1 day). We have seen evidence of the feedback the landlord’s contractor provided of the repair ensuring the boarding is appropriate and the second half of the window had been left to allow light into the bedroom.
  7. The resident confirmed in an email from the same day that the window was secured and asked for an update about the windows replacement. The landlord replied to the resident and advised it was chasing this up with planning, as this was part of planned works. Despite the resident chasing the replacement windows on a number of occasions (in October 2023 and April 2024) here is no evidence it provided an update to the resident until a letter in April 2024 (8 months later) advising of a windows and doors survey. Again this lack of communication caused the resident to have to chase up the landlord for information, causing frustration and distress, which was unreasonable.
  8. In its stage 2 response it apologised for the miscommunication and offered £40 compensation. With all the issues raised, the offer of £40 compensation did not reflect the unnecessary inconvenience and stress caused. There is also no evidence the landlord had previously advised her of this decision. It was also unreasonable for the landlord not to acknowledge the residents’ concerns about the cold and draught coming though her windows, which was affecting her family’s health or that her daughter was vulnerable.   
  9. Although the landlord took appropriate action to secure the window, the repair to this particular window was outstanding for a considerable time (October 2023 to October 2024). During this time, the resident’s reports that she was left with a boarded-up window that was letting in rain and draughts remained not responded to. The resident chased this on 23 October 2023 and 18 April 2024 and reported increased number of chest infections to the household due to the drafts and cold. However, there is no evidence to suggest the landlord considered this reported impact or any interim measures (like additional heaters), prioritised the repair or was proactive in seeking to resolve the issue with its planning team. This was not an appropriate and customer focused approach. 
  10. The landlord’s failure to acknowledge the resident’s health concerns meant the resident experienced an unreasonable level of service. It should have considered its own repair policy where a resident is vulnerable. The above policy states that it is able to adjust its service standards where a delay would put residents at risk because of their condition.
  11. The landlord replaced her windows and doors in October 2024 which was an outcome the resident had been seeking. Although the landlord replaced the resident’s windows and door, the Ombudsman finds maladministration because of the lack of communication, proactivity in arranging the works within reasonable timeframes, acknowledgment of health concerns and attending to service requests.
  12. The landlord’s offer of £40 was not appropriate for the overall failures listed above and identified by this Service. The landlord did not explain its reasons for its failures or the steps it would take to prevent them happening again. Additionally, it did not address the resident’s concerns of increased bills and impact on health. 
  13. Given that it took 12 months for the landlord to complete the repairs to the boarded-up window, the delays in the overall window replacement and the reported increased bills (a definitive sum of which is difficult to establish) this Service considers £20 compensation per month (£240) is an appropriate remedy while the resident was experiencing the boarded-up window issues.
  14. In addition, this Service has ordered additional compensation of £300 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the service failures identified in relation to the planned repairs. This takes into consideration the landlord’s failure to acknowledge the vulnerabilities reported or that it considered them in line with its vulnerable person repairs policy while handling the windows replacement. The total compensation being £540 is in line with the Housing Ombudsman remedies guidance for maladministration where there was a failure which adversely affected the resident, with no permanent impact.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s file shows the resident escalated her complaint by email on 29 November 2023 and again on 12 January 2024 yet the landlord failed to log this as a stage 2 escalation under its internal complaint process.
  2. The landlord’s failure to act in line with its complaint policy resulted in the resident having to approach the Service for assistance to escalate her complaint. This was inappropriate and caused delays in the landlord’ providing its stage 2 response, the resident approaching our Service for investigation and final resolution.
  3. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 27 February 2024, which was 63 working days from the initial escalation and 43 days over the landlord’s policy of 20 days. It recognised its delays and offered the resident £20 compensation and an apology. Although an apology and compensation were reasonable steps, the full extent of the delay was not acknowledged by the landlord, and particularly that the resident escalated as early as November 2023. As such, the amount of compensation was not proportionate to the delays and the time and trouble caused to the resident having to chase the landlord since November 2023 and having to ask this Service for assistance.

 

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of replacement windows.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the associated complaint

Orders and recommendations

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the Ombudsman orders the landlord to:
    1. Apologise to the resident for the failures identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident £640 (including £60 offered during its complaints process if not paid already) total compensation, made up of:
      1. £240 compensation in relation to the landlord’s failure and delays in completing window repairs.
      2. £300 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by the failures identified. (This includes the £40 already offered if not already paid by the landlord.)
      3. £100 compensation in recognition of the failings identified in this investigation in its complaint handling. (This includes the £20 already offered if not already paid by the landlord.)
    3. Provide evidence of compliance with the above orders.