London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202431389)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202431389

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

30 July 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 effects of disrepair on the value of the resident’s property.
    2. The landlord’s handling of leaks, damp and mould.
    3. The landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident has a shared ownership lease of a 2-bedroom, second floor flat that he purchased in March 2019. The resident lives at the property with his young son. The landlord is a housing association and owns the headlease to the building. The building was constructed in 2018.
  2. The landlord’s records show it recorded a “building defect” for a roof leak on 22 November 2022. The report was closed on 7 March 2023.
  3. On 13 September 2023 the resident complained to the landlord about recurrent roof leaks. He said the roof had leaked since April 2019 and asked why the issues had not been resolved.
  4. The resident complained again on 27 June 2024. He said there had been multiple roof leaks and repairs over the previous 5 years. The resident said the landlord had not responded to a report of damp and mould he made “a few weeks ago”. He said the leaks had caused damp and mould in his property and had reduced the value of his property.
  5. The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response on 27 September 2024. It apologised for the delay responding to the resident’s complaint from September 2023. The landlord said works to the roof were complete and it had paid an unspecified amount of compensation to the resident.
  6. The resident escalated his complaint to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaint process on 28 September 2024.
  7. The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response on 28 October 2024. It said more leaks had been reported and it would work with the building developer to resolve the issues. It said it was unable to comment on whether the resident’s property had depreciated in value. It apologised for the stress and inconvenience caused to the resident by the continued defects. The landlord confirmed it had paid £1040 to the resident for his damaged belongings.
  8. The resident was unhappy with the landlord’s response and referred his complaint to us on 17 November 2024. He said there were recurrent roof leaks, and he wanted the landlord to affect a lasting repair and pay compensation.

Assessment and findings

The effects of disrepair on the value of the resident’s property

Jurisdiction

  1. As part of the complaint the resident said ongoing disrepair had reduced the value of his property.
  2. Paragraph 42(f) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme) states the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which, the Ombudsman considers it quicker, fairer, more reasonable or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts, other tribunal or procedure.
  3. The Ombudsman does not have the expertise to determine whether the handling of repairs affected the value of the resident’s property. It is more appropriate for such matters to be considered by a court. The effects of disrepair on the value of the resident’s property is therefore outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

The landlord’s handling of leaks, damp and mould

  1. The evidence indicates there had been issues with the roof since the building was constructed. However, the earliest repair record provided by the landlord is on 23 November 2022, when it raised a work order for a ‘roof leak’. The repair was raised as a ‘defect’.
  2. The lease confirms the landlord is responsible for the maintenance and repair of the roof. The landlord’s repairs policy states it will attend emergency works within 24 hours. The policy says the landlord will complete routine repairs “in an average of 25 calendar days”. The landlord has not provided an alternative repair timeline for the resolution of ‘defects’.
  3. The landlord closed the repair on 7 March 2023. Its repair records do not specify the nature of any works completed. The order was closed after 105 working days. This was 80 days after the average target completion timeline set out in the landlord’s repairs policy. The landlord acted inappropriately in not completing the repair within the timeframe set out in its policy.
  4. The resident reported a leak on 12 September 2023. He contacted the landlord the next day, on 13 September 2023, and expressed disappointment he had not been contacted about the repair. The resident asked for the issue to be logged as a formal complaint.
  5. An internal landlord email sent on 7 May 2024 said it was waiting for the developer to start works. The landlord was responsible for the maintenance and repair of the roof, regardless of whether this responsibility was discharged by a contractor or by a developer. At this stage, it had been 237 days since the resident reported the leak. There is no evidence the landlord provided the resident with updates during this period. The landlord should have explained why the timeline for routine repairs had been breached and when the repairs would be completed. However, there is no evidence the landlord communicated any information about the status of the repair to the resident. This was unreasonable.
  6. On 22 May 2024 the landlord raised a repair for a roof leak following a report from the resident that the ceiling and walls in his property, and the communal landing were wet. The landlord’s records said it raised the repair in error, and the report should have been sent to the managing agent. The landlord has not provided any communication between itself and the agent and there is no evidence the repair was re-raised. It is likely this contributed to a delay in carrying out the repair and resolving the issues the resident reported. This was unreasonable.
  7. The landlord spoke with the resident on 4 and 5 June 2024 and agreed to pay the resident for belongings damaged by the leak. The landlord acted reasonably in using its discretion to reimburse the resident. There is, however, no evidence that a repair had been raised, which was unreasonable and suggests the resident was still living with an ongoing leak.
  8. In the resident’s complaint to the landlord on 27 June 2024 he said it had failed to respond to a report of damp and mould he “made a few weeks ago”. The resident said the damp and mould was due to recurrent roof leaks and it could endanger his son’s health.
  9. The landlord’s damp and mould policy says for shared owners it will “meet the responsibilities in the terms of the lease but will always provide relevant guidance and support”. The lease says the landlord is responsible for the roof and the resident the internal maintenance and décor.
  10. The landlord had not resolved the roof leak at the time of the resident’s report. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect the landlord to have carried out an inspection after receiving the report of damp and mould. There is however, no evidence an inspection was conducted at this time. This was unreasonable.
  11. The landlord raised a work order on 11 July 2024 for a roof leak and water ingress into the resident’s bedroom. The repair was raised 50 days after the resident reported the issues. The delay in raising the repair was unreasonable. It delayed the leak being rectified and would have increased the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.
  12. On 27 September 2024 the landlord provided a stage 1 complaint response and said the developer had completed the roof works. These works are not included in the repair records provided by the landlord. Accurate and complete repair records are essential to allow a landlord to meet its repair obligations and to demonstrate it has done so. It was unreasonable that the landlord did not record the works undertaken or was unable to provide this information.
  13. On 1 October 2024 the landlord raised a work order for a “new” roof leak. In its stage 2 response on 28 October 2024 the landlord said it would work with the developer to resolve the ongoing issues. The landlord did not specify the nature of the works or a timeline for their completion but said it would keep the resident updated. The landlord also referred to a report on damp and mould issues. It has not provided a copy of the report.
  14. On 1 July 2025 the landlord told this Service it intended to complete roof works and remove scaffolding from the building during the week commencing 7 July 2025.
  15. Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, our role is to consider whether the redress offered put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this we take into account whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles; be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
  16. The landlord reimbursed the resident for belongings damaged by the leak. This was reasonable. It apologised for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident but did not offer compensation for this. The landlord did not act quickly and there were delays raising and conducting a damp and mould inspection. Its communication on the status of the roof works was inadequate. The roof leak was unresolved when it provided the stage 2 response, however, it failed to say when the repairs would be completed or how it would provide updates on the works. Taking all matters into account, we have found maladministration.
  17. We have ordered the landlord to pay £900 compensation for the failings in its handling or leaks, damp and mould. This is in accordance with our remedies guidance where there has been a failure that adversely affected the resident. We have also ordered the landlord to apologise to the resident and to provide an update in writing on the repairs.

Complaint handling

  1. Under the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code), landlords must:
    1. Acknowledge a complaint within 5 working days.
    2. Give a stage 1 response within 10 working days of the acknowledgement.
    3. Give a stage 2 response within 20 working days of the acknowledgement.
  2. On 13 September 2023 the resident complained to the landlord about its handling of roof leaks. The landlord acknowledged receipt of the resident’s complaint on the same date.
  3. On 27 June 2024 the resident complained about its handling of the roof leaks, damp and mould. The landlord acknowledged receipt of the resident’s complaint on 28 June 2024.
  4. It sent its stage 1 complaint response on 27 September 2024. The landlord said it was responding to the resident’s complaint from 18 September 2023 and apologised for “the inexcusable delay”.
  5. The response was 267 working days after the resident submitted his original complaint and 66 working days after the resident submitted a further complaint to the landlord. The landlord failed to comply with the timelines set out in the Code. It did not provide an explanation for the delay.
  6. The stage 1 response did not address all elements of the resident’s complaint. The resident had complained about damp and mould and the effects of the disrepair on the value of the property. However, these issues were not covered in the complaint response. The Code requires landlords to address all points raised in complaint definitions. The landlord failed to comply with this requirement.
  7. The landlord said the resident asked for his complaint to be escalated to stage 2 of its complaints process on 28 September 2024. It has not provided a copy of the resident’s escalation request.
  8. The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response on 28 October 2024. We cannot say if this was within 20 working days of the resident’s escalation request, as we have not been provided with a copy of the request. This was 287 working days after the resident submitted his original complaint. The landlord did not apologise for the delay.
  9. In summary, the landlord took over a year to respond to the complaint the resident submitted in September 2023. Its stage 1 response did not address all the points the resident had complained about. This significantly delayed the resident’s access to a complaint resolution and caused him additional time, trouble, distress and inconvenience. As a result, there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling. The landlord is ordered to apologise and to pay £300 compensation. This is in accordance with our remedies guidance where there has been a failure that adversely affected the resident.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 42(f) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme the effects of disrepair on the value of the resident’s property is outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of leaks, damp and mould.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its complaint handling.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks from the date of this determination, the landlord must:
    1. Apologise to the resident, in writing, for the failings identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident total compensation of £1,100, this is made up of:
      1. £900 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s response to leaks to the roofs of the building.
      2. £200 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s complaint handling.

The compensation should be paid to the resident and should not be paid to a rent or service charges account.

  1. Write to the resident and this Service to confirm the roof works have been completed and the scaffolding removed from the building. If the roof works have not been completed the landlord must write to the resident and this Service and explain the reason for the delay and provide the date when the works will be completed. This must be done within 4 weeks of the date of this determination.
  2. Carry out a damp and mould inspection of the resident’s property. It must provide the resident and this Service with a copy of the inspection report and a schedule for any necessary remedial works. The works should start no later than 6 weeks after the survey is completed.
  3. Provide evidence of compliance with these orders within the timescales set out above.