London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202400007)

Decision
Case ID	202400007
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	London & Quadrant Housing Trust
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Shared Ownership
Date	28 November 2025

Background

1. The resident was concerned about several fire safety issues within the property and the landlord’s communication. She said it has not followed through with the commitments it made following a previous determination from the Ombudsman.

What the complaint is about

2. This complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. The resident’s concerns about fire safety.
   2. The complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found:
   1. Maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about fire safety.
   2. Maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about fire safety

4. The landlord failed to communicate effectively with the resident over a significant period, resulting in unmet expectations.

The landlord’s handling of the complaint

5. The landlord apologised for the delays. The compensation offered was insufficient when considering the length of the delay the resident experienced.

 

 

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 it has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 05 January 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £750 made up as follows: £500 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the issues £60 offered in its responses for its complaint handling failure £190 in addition for distress, inconvenience, time, and trouble she experienced due to its poor complaint handling It must pay this directly to the resident by the due date. It must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. It may deduct from the total figure any payments it has already made.	No later than 05 January 2026
3	Inspection order  We have made an inspection order because the resident continued to report odours from the bin store, disturbances by the fan, and fire safety concerns due to no ducting in the ventilation shaft.   What the landlord must do  The landlord must contact the resident to arrange an inspection to investigate her concerns. The landlord must take all reasonable steps to ensure it completes the inspection by the due date. A suitably qualified person must complete it. If the landlord cannot gain access, it must provide us with documentary evidence of its attempts to inspect the property no later than the due date. It must provide a copy of its inspection report to this Service.	No later than 12 January 2026
4	Clarification order Following the inspection, the landlord must write to the resident to set out its final position regarding: the bin store insulation of the canopy It must set out: whether it is responsible for resolving the issues, together with reasons where it is not responsible  a scope of works to achieve a lasting resolution to the issues (if it is responsible)  the likely timescales to commence and complete the work  whether its position has changed following its email dated 8 December 2023. If so, it must explain why.	No later than 19 January 2026

 

 

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
17 October 2023	We issued determination 202105177. We found severe maladministration for all aspects of the complaint and made several orders.
21 November 2023	The resident complained to the landlord about issues in the construction of the building including: no intumescent seals between the fire escape lobby and the flat missing fire breaks in the cavity walls between each floor failure to install the ductwork between the bin store and the roof To resolve the complaint, she asked it to reimburse the rent paid from October 2016 to when the ESW1 form was issued in July 2023. She also requested £5,000 compensation.
8 December 2023	The landlord updated the resident following determination 202105177 in response to our orders. It said: it would insulate the bike store ceiling it would refer to a fire engineer about the possibility of installing blown insulation into the canopy to enhance the thermal comfort of the bedroom above the current installation of the bin store did not align with the original design. It proposed to install ducting through the shaft and fire seal the bottom. It said it was waiting on design, costs, and for a fire engineer to review its suggestion
Between February and March 2024	The resident chased the landlord several times for a response to her complaint.
6 June 2024	The landlord’s stage 1 response stated that the remedial works were necessary for building safety, but defects did not affect habitability. It said it addressed the resident’s concerns about bin store ductwork with a previous complaint. The building was inspected, remedial work completed, and it received a B1 rating in line with legislation. It refused her request for reimbursement of rent. It offered £60 compensation for the delay addressing the complaint.
7 June 2024	The resident made a further complaint to the landlord. She said it failed to honour the commitments set out in its email dated 8 December 2023.
23 June 2024	The resident said she had not received a response to the complaint she raised on 7 June 2024. She asked the landlord to escalate her complaint to stage 2.
Throughout July 2024	The resident chased the landlord for a response to her complaint on at least 3 occasions.
10 September 2024	The resident provided further comments to the landlord following the stage 1 response issued on 6 June 2024. She requested a stage 2 response.
17 September 2024	The landlord acknowledged the complaint at stage 2.
30 September 2024	The resident told the landlord that she had not received a stage 2 complaint response and asked if she should go straight to this Service.
14 October 2024	The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. It said it employed a fire inspector to oversee the remedial works, a fire engineer reviewed the evidence, conducted additional inspections, and issued EWS1 forms in July 2023. It confirmed it did not pay for the rectification works to the external wall and kept residents updated. It said it resolved the matter concerning the ducting to the bin store under a previous complaint. It reoffered the £60 it awarded at stage 1.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident was unhappy with the landlord’s final complaint response and referred the complaint to us. To resolve the complaint, she wants the landlord to do the works it agreed to in December 2023, reimburse her rent from 2016, and compensate her £5000.

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	The resident’s concerns about fire safety.
Finding	Maladministration

What we have not considered

6. The resident previously brought a complaint to us about fire safety which we determined on 17 October 2023. This was subsequently closed following the landlord’s compliance with our orders. We are unable to investigate matters which we have already decided upon. Any reference to events previously considered is for context only.
7. The resident complained about the landlord’s response to defects in the external wall system. She sought a refund of rent from October 2016 to when the ESW1 form was issued in July 2023, once it had completed remedial work. We encourage residents to raise complaints with their landlord when issues arise or within a reasonable time, usually within 12 months. Based on this and the evidence available, we have focused our investigation on the period following the previous determination. This concerns the canopy insulation, bike store insulation, and bin store.

What we have considered

8. In our previous determination we ordered the landlord to arrange a heat loss survey for the bedrooms above the entrance canopy. This included engaging a qualified surveyor to check the bin store ventilation shaft and bike store. We said it must write to the resident confirming its repairing responsibilities, outlining any planned work, timescales, cost implications, and explaining reasons if it decided not to act on survey recommendations.
9. The landlord has not provided copies of the heat loss survey or inspection reports to us, however there are references to surveyors attending within the records provided.
10. On 8 December 2023, the landlord informed the resident that it would install additional ceiling insulation to the bike store after thermal checks revealed a temperature drop in the bedroom above. Regarding the entrance canopy, although insulation met design standards, it found a void. It said it was exploring a solution using blown insulation, subject to fire engineer approval. For the bin store, it said it completed fire stopping following a risk assessment, and investigations revealed deviations from the original ventilation design. To resolve odour and fire safety concerns, the landlord proposed to install ducting through the shaft, pending design, costs, and fire engineer review.
11. Records show there were delays progressing the insulation to the bike store. The landlord updated the resident on 22 December 2023. It said its contractor had issues purchasing the insulation and it was awaiting a start date.
12. Works to the bike store started around February 2024. At this time, the landlord updated the resident stating that contractors would scope the works to install a ventilation shaft from the bin store to the extract on the top floor through the riser, and that it had agreed a solution with the developer. It anticipated that it would complete these works in April/May 2024. The landlord has not provided a copy of the scope of works or evidence of its communication with the developer.
13. The resident chased for an update in April 2024. The landlord said a fire officer would undertake an inspection on 1 May 2024 with its technical inspector. It has not provided us with any reports or documentary evidence from this inspection. It also failed to update the resident or manage her expectations.
14. The landlord’s internal records from 12 June 2024 state its fire officer recommended:
    1. resealing the fire resisting doors to the vented shaft in communal lobbies on each storey around the openings and hinges
    2. removing escutcheon plates on exterior faces of the doors and fitting blanking plates over the top of the locks. It could also fit blanking plates on the inside of the door locks if this did not prevent the locking/unlocking of the doors, if required in the future
    3. removing the firestopping at the base of the shaft and recommissioning the fan at the top following the completion of points A and B.
15. The landlord has not demonstrated that it communicated its revised approach to the resident. It did not explain why it chose to proceed with this option instead of its proposal outlined in its email dated 8 December 2023. It also failed to set out its position regarding the proposed additional insulation to the canopy.
16. Correspondence indicates the resident was concerned about fire safety, particularly relating to the bin store and ventilation. She repeatedly raised concerns and requested updates and clarity. She felt the landlord did not take her concerns seriously, as it did not provide effective communication or clear responses despite multiple requests. She informed it that fumes from the bin store were leaking into the lobby and the noise of the fan was impacting her sleep. She also reraised the issue with canopy insulation and said the landlord had failed to resolve it, despite making complaints.
17. The landlord informed us that its technical inspector visited on the 26July 2024 and stood outside the bin store by the vent. He confirmed that there were no smells coming from the store and the fan was working correctly. While it was reasonable for it to attend in response to the resident’s concerns, it has not provided documentary evidence from its inspection or demonstrated its communication with the resident over the issues raised.
18. Overall, the landlord did not manage the issues appropriately. It failed to respond to some of the resident’s contact, and where it did respond, there were delays and a lack of clarity. These shortcomings resulted in an extended period where the resident likely felt unheard and frustrated. We also note that the limited information supplied to this Service has impacted our investigation. We have, therefore, made orders for the landlord to provide clarity to the resident, in addition to a compensation award of £500. This is in line with our remedies guidance for when there has been a failure which adversely affected a resident.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of the complaint
Finding	Maladministration

19. Under the Complaint Handling Code (the Code), landlords must issue stage 1 responses within 10 working days of acknowledging a complaint, with a possible 10-day extension. Stage 2 responses are due within 20 working days, extendable by another 20 working days. A landlord should not exceed these timeframes without valid justification.
20. The landlord’s complaint policy at the time of the complaint complies with the definition of a complaint in the Code. The timescales in the landlord’s complaint procedure did comply with the Code.
21. The landlord issued late responses at both stages of its complaint process. It took over 28 weeks to respond at stage 1. There were also delays acknowledging the complaints. This was not in line with the Code or its complaints policy. These delays caused frustration and uncertainty for the resident and undermined her confidence in the complaints process.
22. The landlord told the resident that it had addressed the bin store issue in a previous response, but it failed to recognise that her new complaint arose because she believed it had not completed the promised actions from 8 December 2023. It also ignored her concern about the canopy. This dismissive approach shows a lack of understanding of her complaint and likely left her feeling unheard. This is concerning given the linked case where we found severe maladministration in its handling of the complaint. The continued failure to respond in line with the Code or its own policy suggests it has not learned from previous shortcomings. This undermines dispute resolution principles, which require landlords to learn from outcomes.
23. At stage 1, the landlord apologised for the delay and offered £60 compensation. It reoffered this at stage 2. This was not proportionate to recognise the delays, nor the time and trouble spent by the resident pursuing an outcome.
24. The resident made another complaint on 7 June 2024 following advice from this Service. The landlord has not evidenced that it properly addressed her concerns. This meant that the issues complained about were not resolved through its internal complaint procedure, resulting in her chasing for responses on multiple occasions before asking us to intervene. Our Scheme permits us to look at issues where there is evidence of a complaint-handling failure, and we are satisfied that the member has not acted within a reasonable timescale.
25. Due to the cumulative failings in the landlord’s complaint handling and the level of detriment experienced by the resident, we have made an order for additional compensation to be paid.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

26. It is vital for landlords to keep clear, accurate and easily accessible records to provide an audit trail of events. This helps us to understand its actions and decision making at the time. Due to the limited information provided by the landlord concerning its inspections and consideration of the issues, we are unable to conclude that it acted fully in line with its obligations.

Communication

27. The landlord did not maintain effective communication with the resident throughout this case. It failed to provide regular updates, and she spent considerable time chasing for information and progress. These failures worsened the situation and increased the impact on her. They also further damaged the relationship between the parties.