London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202504846)
|
Decision |
|
|
Case ID |
202504846 |
|
Decision type |
Investigation |
|
Landlord |
London & Quadrant Housing Trust |
|
Landlord type |
Housing Association |
|
Occupancy |
Assured Tenancy |
|
Date |
13 March 2026 |
Background
- The resident reported that the heating was not working in the property and she raised a complaint to the landlord. She was unhappy with its response. She was in remission from cancer, which the landlord was aware of during the complaint period.
What the complaint is about
- The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
- Reports of heating issues.
- Complaint.
Our decision (determination)
- We have found:
- Maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of heating issues.
- Service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.
We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.
Summary of reasons
Reports of heating issues
- The landlord did not meet its repair timescales, missed appointments to repair the heating, and arrived outside of agreed times, which delayed the repairs. This caused distress and inconvenience to the resident. It had also not responded to her queries about her energy bills.
The handling of the complaint
- The landlord did not acknowledge and respond to the stage 2 response in line with the timescales set out in the Code, which caused the resident inconvenience.
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:
|
No later than 10 April 2026 |
|
2 |
Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £612 made up as follows:
This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. The landlord may deduct from the total figure any payments it has already paid as offered in its complaint responses. |
No later than 10 April 2026 |
|
3 |
Specific action The landlord must consider its compensation policy and write to the resident as to whether it will offer compensation for “out of pocket” expenses for energy use while she relied on electric heaters. This should cover the period from when she reported the heating issue until the date it completed the repairs, as set out in this report. |
No later than 10 April 2026 |
|
4 |
Learning order The landlord must write to the resident and set out what it has learnt from the failures identified in this report, including its handling of the heating repairs, repair appointments, and of the complaint. It must explain what actions it will take to prevent the failures from happening again in the future. |
No later than 10 April 2026 |
Our investigation
The complaint procedure
|
Date |
What happened |
|
10 January 2025 |
The resident reported heating issues in the property. |
|
2 March 2025 |
The resident complained to the landlord that her heating was not working and she wanted it repaired. She said she had been using electric heaters, and it had cost more to heat the house. |
|
13 March 2025 |
The landlord provided its stage 1 response to the resident. It said it drained the radiators and flushed the boiler’s sentinel filter. However, as these steps did not work, it booked a further appointment to remedy the issue. It offered the resident compensation of £90 for appointments it had missed and apologised for the distress and inconvenience caused. |
|
20 March 2025 |
The resident escalated her complaint. She said the contractor told her to clear the spare room, but on the day of the appointment the contractor said it was not necessary. She was unhappy with this and the offer of compensation of £90. She said she had spent money on electric heaters, which had cost more to heat the property. |
|
5 June 2025 |
The landlord provided its stage 2 response. It said it had missed appointments before it resolved the heating issue on 29 May 2025. It made the resident an offer of compensation of £402, broken down as:
|
|
Referral to the Ombudsman |
The resident explained she had taken time off work for multiple appointments that the landlord missed. She said it did not offer interim heating measures, and she used her own electric heaters which cost more to run. She wanted it to improve its repair policy, to cover the cost of using electric heaters, and for higher compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the heating repairs. |
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 |
Reports of heating issues |
|
Finding |
Maladministration |
- The landlord inspected and tried to remedy the heating issue within 25 days of the resident’s report. However, the time it had taken to remedy the issue was short of its repair policy that says it would complete repairs within 20 days.
- In that time the landlord had tried to inspect and repair the issue at least 4 times on 10 January 2025, 17 January 2025, 28 January 2025 and 31 January 2025. It recorded that at least on one of the occasions the resident was not in. There’s no evidence it had arranged this appointment with the resident. This was not in line with its repair policy that says it would provide an appointment to the resident. For one of the other appointments, it had attended at a time that she specified she would not be in. This was unreasonable. For the remaining appointments, it’s unclear why it could not inspect the property on those dates. This has made it difficult to assess.
- The resident complained to the landlord on 2 March 2025 that the heating in the property was not working. She said she had bought electric heaters which she said were expensive to run. It inspected the issue within 18 days and added cleaner to the system, installed a new pump, and changed the heating to a pressurised system. It returned to the property 4 times between 1 and 11 April 2025 to attempt various repairs, but found the boiler was still not working. It ordered replacement parts for the boiler. The resident explained to the landlord that the lack of heating was upsetting her.
- The landlord set an appointment for the morning of 8 May 2025, which the resident tried to rearrange. However, it did not reply to her, and it tried to turn up to the appointment when she was unavailable. It arranged a further appointment for the morning of 21 May 2025. It did not turn up until 10pm when she was unavailable. The lack of coordination and oversight of the repair delayed remedying the heating issue. It inconvenienced the resident who had taken time out of work for appointments that the landlord had not met.
- The landlord repaired the boiler on 29 May 2025 which the resident had confirmed. Even though the landlord had attempted to remedy the heating issue in April 2025, it had taken 88 days to fix the issue. This was not in line with its repair policy at the time that says it would complete repairs within 20 days.
- In the landlord’s complaint response, it offered the resident £140 compensation for the missed appointments, and £172 for the loss of heat and hot water. This was in line with its compensation policy that it would compensate for missed appointments, and it would consider discretionary compensation for the loss of heat and hot water.
- The landlord offered the resident £50 for the distress and inconvenience caused to her by its handling of the heating issue. Its offer considered some impact to her but had not recognised the distress and inconvenience caused to her by its failures, as set out under the summary of reasons of this report.
- The resident provided copies of her utility bills to the landlord to show the energy usage since using her electric heaters, but there’s no evidence it had considered this and provided a response to her. This was not in line with its compensation policy that says it would consider evidence to pay for “out of pocket” expenses.
- The landlord had not apologised for the failures set out under the summary of reasons of this report, and it had not set out learning to prevent this happening again. This was not in line with our dispute resolution principles to be fair, put things right, and learn from outcomes.
|
Complaint |
The handling of the complaint |
|
Finding |
Service failure |
- Our Complaint Handling Code (the Code) sets out when and how a landlord should respond to complaints. The relevant Code in this case is the 2024 edition. The landlord’s complaint policy was in line with the timeframes set out in the Code.
- The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint and sent its stage 1 response to her in line with its complaint policy which says it would acknowledge the complaint within 5 working days and send a stage 1 response within 10 working days.
- The landlord acknowledged the escalation of the complaint in 11 working days and sent its stage 2 response to the resident in 41 working days. This was not in line with its complaint policy which sets out it would acknowledge the escalation of a complaint in 5 working days and provide its stage 2 response within 20 workings days. This inconvenienced the resident as she chased the landlord for a response on 6 May 2025.
- In the landlord’s complaint response, it offered compensation of £40 to the resident for her time and effort in getting the complaint resolved. This went someway to recognise the impact on her. However, it was not in line with our remedies guidance for the distress or inconvenience caused to her by its complaint handling delays. It also had not apologised or set out what lessons it had learnt to prevent it happening again. This was not in line with our dispute resolution principles.
- We have therefore made orders to put things right, including an apology, what lessons it had learnt, and compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.
Learning
- The landlord missed an opportunity to identify learning points in its complaint response for its handling of the repair and the complaint. It would have been in line with our dispute resolution principles for it to have done this within its internal complaint procedure.
Knowledge information management (record keeping)
- Our Repairing Trust spotlight report highlights that strong record keeping, and effective oversight of contractors helps it to keep to appointments, minimise delays, and complete repairs on time. It may wish to review its repair records and contractor oversight processes in line with the report’s recommendations if it has not already done so.
Communication
- Our Attitudes, Respect and Rights Spotlight report recommends that landlords provide proactive updates to residents, especially where there are delays. The landlord had not proactively updated the resident about the substantive issue and the complaint, which likely contributed to their distress and inconvenience when expecting a response.