London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202437717)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202437717

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

28 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s:
1. Handling of a roof leak, damp and mould.
2. Complaint handling.

Background

The resident is a leaseholder and purchased the lease in May 2017. She lives in a top-floor flat in a low-rise block. The resident has health issues and is immunocompromised. The landlord is a housing association and owns the freehold to the building.
In September 2022 the resident reported leaks to her bathroom and kitchen when it rained. The landlord raised a work order, which was recorded as complete on 9 May 2023. The resident reported further leaks into her property in July and August 2024. A roof inspection was completed on 1 September 2024, which advised a ‘drone survey’ was needed. This was carried out on 18 October 2024, and the landlord was then provided with a quote for roof repairs. The landlord subsequently “rejected” the quote and referred the works to an in-house team.
On 23 December 2024 the resident complained to the landlord about its handling of the roof leak. She said the landlord’s failure to act had resulted in damp and mould, and damage to her home. The resident said she was immunocompromised and exposure to damp and mould could be life threatening. She asked the landlord to provide a timeline for inspecting and resolving the roof issues. The resident also asked to be compensated.
The landlord provided a stage 1 complaint response on 24 December 2024 and upheld the resident’s complaint. It said its complaint investigation covered events dating back to September 2023. The landlord stated the following:
1. It had completed a ‘drone survey’ of the roof. It would obtain quotes for the required works. The cost of the works would determine if the landlord had to follow the Section 20 process.
2. Claims for damp and mould or the loss of personal items should be made to the resident’s contents insurance. If the resident did not have insurance she could submit a claim to the landlord’s insurance.
3. It awarded £320 compensation.
On 2 January 2025 the resident asked for her complaint to be escalated as the landlord had not said how it would address the damp and mould. The resident said the landlord should inspect and treat the roof timbers to prevent mould regrowth. The resident restated her request for a timeline for the roof repairs. She also asked to receive regular updates. The resident said the compensation awarded was inadequate for the distress and inconvenience she had suffered.
The landlord provided a stage 2 complaint response on 30 January 2025. It stated the following:
1. It would begin getting quotes for the roof works. It would write to residents if the proposed costs meant it had to follow the Section 20 process.
2. It apologised for the length of time the complaint had been ongoing. It acknowledged the resident was in poor health and the stress of the repair had affected her mentally and financially. It also acknowledged that it had provided the resident with conflicting information about the repair.
3. The compensation award was increased to £1530. This comprised:
  1. £1020 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s failure to “recognise the impact to the resident due to vulnerabilities”.
  2. £150 for the time and effort getting the complaint resolved.
  3. £260 for the repair delays.
  4. £100 towards mould removal.
The resident referred the complaint to us as she was dissatisfied with the landlord’s response. The resident said she wanted the landlord to complete the repairs and to provide adequate compensation.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

In December 2024 the resident complained to the landlord about its handling of roof leaks, damp and mould. We normally expect a complaint to be made within 12 months of the issues arising. This means our investigation usually considers the 12 months before the complaint is made.
In this case, the landlord’s complaint response considers events beginning in September 2023. Taking this into account, our assessment focuses on the period from September 2023 onwards. Any reference in this report to events before this date is for context.

The landlord’s handling of a roof leak, damp and mould

The lease confirms the landlord is responsible for the maintenance and repair of the structure and exterior of the building, including the roof. The landlord is also responsible for the maintenance, repair and decoration of communal areas.
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”.
Following reports of leaks to a different property, the landlord raised a work order in September 2023 for repairs to the roof ‘flashing’ (material used to reinforce areas of the roof vulnerable to water ingress). It said it received reports of further leaks on 4 December 2023. This information was not included in the communal repair records or the repair records for the resident’s property provided by the landlord. It was subsequently advised that further works to the roof were needed. It has not provided information on the nature of these repairs, however, repairs to the roof ‘flashing’ were completed on 6 January 2024.
Accurate and complete repair records are essential to allow a landlord to fulfil its repair responsibilities and to demonstrate it has done so. While the landlord’s complaint responses refer to reports of leaks and repairs undertaken between September 2023 and January 2024 it is unclear which properties were affected or the scale of the repairs. The landlord failed to keep full and accurate repair records.
Following the resident’s report of a leak on 4 July 2024, the landlord ordered an inspection. On 18 July 2024, it was noted the landlord had no appointments available that year. The landlord tried to call the resident on 1 August 2024 but was unable to speak with her. On 2 August 2024, it raised an order with an external contractor for a “roof repair”. It was reasonable for the landlord to see if an internal team could carry out an inspection, before referring the works externally. However, after it was clear the landlord could not do the inspection, it took a further 16 days to raise the work order. The landlord’s repair policy says it will complete ‘routine’ repairs in an average of 25 days. It was therefore unreasonable that it took 30 days for the landlord to schedule an inspection.
The resident contacted the landlord on 9 August 2024 and asked it to return her call and provide an update. At this stage it was 37 days since the resident reported the leak and 12 days after the target deadline for non-emergency repairs. There is, however, no evidence the landlord returned the resident’s call or provided an update on the status of the repair. This was unreasonable.
An inspection was completed on 4 September 2024. This found a ‘drone survey’ of the roof was required. The landlord raised an order for the survey on 18 September 2024. The survey was carried out on 18 October 2024 and on 25 October 2024 the landlord was provided with a quote for the repairs identified in the survey. The landlord has not provided a copy of the survey or the quote. The landlord rejected the quote on 2 December 2024, closed the order and referred the works to an inhouse team. At this stage, it was 152 days since the resident reported the leak. There is no evidence the landlord provided an update to the resident following the inspection, or its decision to close the repair. This was unreasonable.
The resident contacted the landlord by phone on 23 December 2024 to express her dissatisfaction at its handling of the leak. She said there was mould and damp in the corridor outside her flat. The resident told the landlord she was recovering from cancer and was immunocompromised. She said exposure to damp and mould was potentially life threatening. On the same date the resident submitted a formal complaint and said the leak had resulted in damage to her property, damp and mould and increased living costs. The resident asked the landlord for an urgent response and to confirm its plan of action.
The landlord’s vulnerable residents’ policy defines a vulnerable resident as “someone with any condition or circumstance that places them at risk in their home”. The policy applies to all residents. It sets out a range of ways the landlord could support vulnerable residents. These include providing minor health and safety repairs, priority repairs, and signposting to statutory agencies or support organisations.
Its damp and mould policy applies where the landlord has maintenance responsibilities. The policy says on receipt of a report the landlord will establish if an immediate repair is required. It will carry out an assessment within 20 working days. Any remedial works identified in the assessment will be raised within 10 days.
The resident had disclosed health vulnerabilities to the landlord and reported damp and mould. The landlord should have established if there was damp and mould in the resident’s property, as well as the communal areas. There is no evidence the landlord established if an immediate repair was required or arranged an inspection. The landlord failed to comply with both its damp and mould and its vulnerable residents’ policy. This was inappropriate.
The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response offered the resident compensation for “distress for failure to recognise the impact due to vulnerabilities”. However, it failed to say how the resident’s vulnerabilities would affect its handling of the roof leak or damp and mould.
The response said the landlord would refer the roof issues to an internal team and obtain quotes for the necessary repairs. It said the costs of the works would determine whether it needed to follow the Section 20 process. This is a requirement on landlords to consult all leaseholders if they intend to carry out one-off works with a total cost of over £250 per property. It was reasonable for the landlord to advise the resident it might have to follow the Section 20 process. However, its failure to provide any timeline for the next steps in the process was unreasonable. The landlord did not engage with the resident’s request that it treat the issues with “urgency”.
The resident escalated her complaint on 2 January 2025. She said the landlord had not addressed the repairs issues or the mould caused by the leak. The resident asked the landlord to provide a clear timeline for the repairs along with regular updates on the works.
It was clear from the resident’s escalation request that she was not satisfied with the landlord’s response. There is no evidence the landlord conducted a damp and mould inspection of the communal area or established if there was damp and mould in the resident’s property. The landlord was also aware of the resident’s vulnerability. The resident had communicated her concerns about the effects of any damp and mould on her health. It would have been reasonable for the landlord, in addition to escalating her complaint to have considered signposting her to the local authority for a Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) assessment.
An internal landlord email sent on 22 January 2025 confirmed the works had yet to be referred to the internal works team. The email acknowledged issues with the communal roof were longstanding but said “the problem area” was above the resident’s property.
The landlord sent its stage 2 response on 30 January 2025. It apologised for the duration of the disrepair and the service it provided. It restated the process it intended to follow, which entailed referring the works to an internal team, obtaining quotes for the repairs and following the Section 20 process if required.
It increased the compensation offer to £1380. This comprised £1020 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s failure to recognise the resident’s vulnerability, £260 for the repair delay and £100 towards the cost of mould removal.
The landlord’s stage 2 response did not explain the lack of progress in obtaining quotes for the works. It did not address the damp and mould the resident had reported. The response did not address the resident’s request for a clear timeline and regular updates. It had been 211 days since the resident reported the leak. It was reasonable to expect the landlord, as a minimum, to have provided an indicative timeline for the repair and set out how, it would provide meaningful updates on the works.
Following the completion of the internal complaints process, the landlord raised a further work order for ongoing leaks at the resident’s property in March 2025. The resident told this Service on 3 June 2025 the issues had not been resolved.
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 our Dispute Resolution Principles; be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
The landlord apologised to the resident but it did not recognise the scale of its failings. The landlord did not follow its repairs policy or its damp and mould policy. It failed to repair the roof or complete a damp and mould inspection within the required timeframes. The landlord’s communication was inadequate, and it consistently failed to provide the resident with updates or explain when the roof repairs would be completed. The landlord’s failure to follow its vulnerability policy is an aggravating feature of the case, which would have heightened the resident’s distress.
These failings, and the fact the leak is unresolved over 1 year after the resident’s report means the circumstances for severe maladministration apply. The compensation awarded by the landlord falls within the range of awards for severe maladministration set out in our remedies guidance. However, the compensation was awarded in January 2025 and over 6 months later the repair is unresolved. The landlord is therefore ordered to apologise and to pay £500 additional compensation to the resident. This is in accordance with our remedies guidance for cases where there have been serious failings by the landlord.

The landlord’s complaint handling

The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code), says 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.
On 23 December 2024 the resident complained to the landlord about its handling of a roof leak and resultant damp and mould.
The landlord provided a complaint acknowledgement and stage 1 response on 24 December 2024.
The response did not demonstrate the landlord had conducted a thorough investigation into the resident’s concerns. It contained contradictory information about whether the landlord had spoken with the resident or not. It also advised that it had “raised a complaint action task to the roofing team for the referral to be submitted to the minor works team”. The Code requires landlords to include any outstanding actions in the complaint response. The landlord set out an element of its internal process, rather than the outstanding action, which was the roof repair. This was inappropriate.
On 2 January 2025 the resident asked for her complaint to be escalated to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaints process.
The landlord provided a stage 2 complaint response on 30 January 2025. The landlord awarded £150 compensation for the “time and effort getting the complaint resolved”.
The response was provided in 20 working days, which met the requirements of the Code.
The landlord’s stage 1 response did not demonstrate it had conducted a thorough investigation of the issues the resident had raised. The redress offered by the landlord falls within the range of awards in our remedies guidance for a failure which adversely affected a resident and was reasonable in the circumstances.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was severe maladministration by the landlord in its handling of a roof leak, damp and mould.
In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was reasonable redress by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders

Within 4 weeks from the date of the report, the landlord must:
1. Apologise to the resident, in writing, for the failings identified in this report. A senior manager must make the apology on behalf of the landlord.
2. Pay the resident total compensation of £1880 (the landlord may deduct from this amount any payment it has already made) for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by the landlord’s failings in its handling of a roof leak, damp and mould.
3. Pay the compensation awarded by the Ombudsman direct to the resident.
The landlord should confirm to the resident and this Service if it is required to conduct a Section 20 consultation on the roof repairs. If a Section 20 consultation is required, the landlord should provide a schedule with the consultation starting within 4 weeks. If a Section 20 consultation is not required, the landlord should provide a schedule of works for the roof repairs. The repairs should be scheduled to start within 4 weeks thereafter.
The landlord should carry out a damp and mould inspection of the communal area outside the resident’s property. It should confirm with the resident if the interior of her property is affected by damp and mould and carry out an inspection if required. It should 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.
The landlord should reply to this Service with evidence of compliance with these orders within the timescales set out above.