London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202331394)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202331394

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

26 August 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 the landlord’s handling of heat loss in a bedroom in the resident’s property.
2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

3. The resident is an assured tenant of a 2 bedroom first floor flat. The bedroom subject to the resident’s concerns is situated above a large void area.
4. On 18 October 2023, the resident made a complaint to the landlord, she raised concerns about the temperature of her children’s bedroom which was freezing cold (under 14 degrees) for over 10 years. She:
   1. Explained the room, including the hallway and bathroom were over a driveway tunnel, and there was a void of at least half a metre running underneath the room. It needed insulation from the outside and the room was too cold for her children to use.
   2. Raised dissatisfaction at the expectation of having to use the central heating daily during the winter to heat the room and even then, it remained significantly colder than the rest of the property. She also said that the wooden double glazing had draughts coming through. The floor was ice cold to walk on.
   3. A specialist needed to attend and inspect the structure of the building, and the floor needed insulation from outside.
5. The landlord ordered a heat loss survey, and its contractor attended on 6 November 2023. Its records say during the visit, the contractor explained to the resident that the issue related to the size of the radiators in the room. She told them that this was not the case, and the issue with the insulation in the cavity walls and insulating the drive through underneath. She also raised issues with air coming through the windows. The contractor said they did not complete the heat loss survey as the resident was not in agreement. The resident clarified to the landlord on 15 November 2023 that the contractor attended, and they said the survey was a waste of time. She asked it to raise an official complaint.
6. The landlord provided its stage 1 response on 15 November 2023 and apologised for the delay in its response. It said following its investigation, it could confirm the Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) rating of her property was C. This was above the national average of D. It explained the certificate confirmed that her walls already had cavity wall insulation and the property was double glazed. It explained the location of the bedroom in question and said it had arranged for a heat loss survey, and to check the size usage of the radiator in the room to ensure it was of adequate size. It found the radiator was undersized, a follow on order to renew the radiator would be authorised. After reviewing her complaint and the information available, it was satisfied it did not fail in providing a service to her and did not uphold her complaint.
7. The resident responded on the same day and asked to escalate her complaint to stage 2. She said she had not refused the heat loss survey and explained she had shown the surveyor outside and explained about the floor and the void outside to the surveyor. They then said unless she wanted the radiators relocated, the survey was a waste of time. She told them, she was concerned the landlord would say she refused the survey if they did not complete it. The surveyor said they would make it clear in their report the issue was the floor.
8. The landlord completed another heat loss survey on 24 January 2024. The survey identified that the flooring in the resident’s property had no insulation. The landlord discussed internally how it would approach the issue.
9. The parties continued communicating about the issue, and the landlord raised further surveys of the property as well as works to try to identify if there was insulation in the floor. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 25 April 2024. It apologised for the delay in its response and reiterated the EPC scoring of the property, and findings that she needed bigger radiators to provide adequate heating. It said there were temperature and humidity sensors in the second bedroom which showed that the temperature did not fall below 17 degrees which was the minimum bedroom temperature threshold. It said it deemed its stage 1 response adequate.
10. The resident raised her concerns around the issue with us in December 2023. She told us on 12 June 2024 that as a resolution she wanted the landlord to insulate the flooring in the bedroom and compensate her for the distress and inconvenience caused.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

11. The resident raised a separate complaint in January 2023 about the wooden window frames and the draughts caused which led to mould and condensation in her children’s room. As the damp and mould element was subject to a separate complaint and there is no evidence this matter exhausted the landlord’s complaints process, we shall not consider it within this investigation. We shall however consider the issue around the windows, as she raised this matter again within this complaint.
12. The resident raised concerns about the effects of the situation on her children’s health. We cannot consider impact on health as this requires a determination of causation and liability. The courts make such decisions, as such the resident may wish to seek independent advice.
13. We can see that the resident raised this issue on a regular basis during her tenancy. We will usually only consider a complaint that has been raised with the landlord within twelve months of the matter arising which has then exhausted the landlord’s complaint process. Therefore, this investigation will consider the landlord’s actions around the issue in response to the complaint made in October 2023. Any reference to previous concerns will be referred to for contextual purpose only.

Heat loss in a bedroom in the resident’s property

14. The resident raised concerns about heat loss in the property and explained she believed the issue was due to the level of insulation in the flooring of the children’s bedroom. She explained that she believed the void underneath the room caused the drop in temperature in the room as well as concerns with the windows as they allowed draughts into the room.
15. The evidence shows that the landlord identified it had completed works to the resident’s windows to prevent cold coming through, however, the resident reported that the room remained cold. It identified that the property needed bigger radiators in November 2023. The resident explained that she declined these due to concerns about space. She told us during a telephone conversation on 12 August 2025 that she was concerned about the space in the room as her children shared a bedroom. The landlord appropriately said internally on 2 January 2024 that it needed to exhaust all avenues of investigation to resolve the coldness in the room for the resident. It then completed a heat loss survey in January 2024 which found that the party floor was concrete and uninsulated. It also reiterated that the radiators required an upgrade.
16. We understand the resident’s concerns about the insulation, but it is not in our remit to decide if a landlord should complete potential improvement works, such as adding insulation to the flooring. The landlord’s obligation in this instance is to ensure that the property provides a reasonable degree of thermal comfort and is free from hazards such as excess cold in line with the Decent Homes Standard, and the Housing Health and Safety Rating System. The resident explained that the room temperature reached below 14 degrees without the heating on while the rest of the property could be 20 degrees.
17. The HHSRS says a healthy indoor temperature is around 21 degrees and the landlord noted the property reached at least 20 degrees. The landlord showed in its stage 2 response that between October 2023 and March 2024 the temperature in the room did not drop below 20 degrees. It obtained this evidence through a temperature and humidity sensor in the room. It is however unclear if the resident had the heating on at the time of these readings.
18. The landlord told the resident across both its stage 1 and 2 responses that the EPC rating of the property was an above average rating of C. This meets the governments long term targets for social housing and suggested it met relevant obligations to do with providing a warm and energy efficient home. However, it is important to note that the EPC certificate expired in 2021, and according to the government’s website, the property has not since had an updated EPC rating. Therefore, if it has not already done so the landlord will need to ensure an up to date EPC certificate is in place. This is especially so, as the EPC it relied on, provided no rating for the flooring.
19. While appropriate that the landlord completed the heat loss survey, we have seen no evidence that it took any further action following the findings of the heat loss survey around the lack of insulation in the flooring. We would expect it to at least ascertain whether the lack of insulation was contributing to the resident’s concerns, or if there were other issues such as the windows that required attention. It has not shown that it did, and this is inappropriate.
20. To do so it could have taken appropriate measures, such as completing a thermal imaging inspection to identify where the heating escaped the property. This would have allowed it to cater its approach to the situation. It also would have been appropriate for the landlord to query with the resident how she maintained the temperature of the room. It said internally in October 2023 that the room was cold, but its findings showed that the temperature did not drop below 20 degrees at that time. The resident had also mentioned an increase in her bills due to constantly needing to heat the room. It should have considered this as part of its evidence gathering. The failure to do so was inappropriate.
21. On 2 January 2024 the landlord said that improving the insulation to the void area below the flooring to the upper flats, in its opinion was an improvement to the property and not a repair. It said this would most likely require resident’s consultation under section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. The evidence suggests that the landlord was considering its options, but has not evidence that it explained this to the resident at this time and this was inappropriate.
22. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to explain its options to the resident at the earliest opportunity. This would have allowed it to manage her expectations and inform her of the potential implications and requirements if it did treat it as an improvement.
23. The evidence shows that it looked to complete another inspection of the resident’s flooring in May 2024. It is unclear why, and there is no information on the findings of this. The resident contacted the landlord again 3 months later and said there had been no further action. It is unclear if it was dealing with the matter as an improvement or a repair. The resident confirmed to us in August 2025 that the issue remains outstanding, and she has received no updates around the issue. This means that the resident has not received a definitive outcome around the issue for 2 years and 10 months and this is unreasonable. We have also seen no evidence that the landlord considered or took any action around her concerns with the windows and draughts, and this was inappropriate.
24. We asked the landlord on 11 August 2025 for an update around the radiators, the works raised on 8 May 2024, and how it decided to deal with the insulation. It provided no relevant information. It said that there was a gap under the bedroom and toilet that needed filling. It also raised concerns with the window, saying they were cracked, in bad condition and cold. This means between the resident raising her concerns with the windows, and the time of the investigation, it has not demonstrated it took any action around them. This is a delay of 1 year and 10 months and this inappropriate, and not in line with its repairs timeframes.
25. In summary the landlord recommended radiator upgrades which the resident declined. A survey later confirmed there was no floor insulation in the room, but the landlord did not explain how it would address this. It also failed to clarify its position when we asked. The issues remain unresolved, and it has not shown any action around the resident’s concerns around the window. While it cited an above average EPC rating, this was based on an expired certificate that did not assess the flooring. It has not demonstrated that it investigated whether the lack of floor insulation, or the windows were responsible for the reported heat loss. Based on this we find there was maladministration.
26. The landlord’s compensation policy says it will consider the individual’s circumstances and details of the situation to ensure it offered appropriate compensation. It will award compensation where its mistake or failure causes a resident distress and inconvenience and/or needs a resident to spend unnecessary time and effort in getting it to put things right. Discretionary payments should consider the individual household circumstances, such as larger sized households and/ or specific vulnerabilities and where this caused greater impact.
27. The landlord did not offer the resident any compensation as it found no failings in its approach. However, it failed to consider the inconvenience caused to the resident. She continued to chase the matter after the stage 2 response as it remained unresolved, and it was not sufficiently clear about its approach throughout the process. Based on this, we order that the landlord pay the resident compensation.

Complaint handling

28. The landlord operates a 2 stage complaints process. It will acknowledge a complaint within 5 working days and provide its response within 10 working days of acknowledging the complaint. It will provide a stage 2 response within 20 working days of the request to escalate. If it needed long, it would explain why and write to the resident within a further 10 working days. If it needed even longer to respond, it would try to agree this with the resident but if they were not happy with an extension they could contact us.
29. The resident raised her complaint on 18 October 2023 with the landlord. It provided its stage 1 response 5 working days outside of its policy timeframe and this was inappropriate. We cannot see that it contacted the resident to ask for an extension for the delayed response. Its actions were not in line with its complaints process.
30. The resident then asked to escalate her complaint on 15 November 2023. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 20 November 2023 and acknowledged it again on 14 March 2024. It then provided its response on 25 April 2024. As the resident escalated on 15 November 2023, the landlord’s response was due by no later than 20 December 2023. We have seen no further communication between the parties to show that it requested an extension to provide its response so late. It delayed in its response by over 4 months and this was inappropriate.
31. The landlord also failed to address all of the resident’s concerns in its response. She raised concerns about the windows allowing draughts, however the landlord has provided no response to this in its responses and this was inappropriate. Based on these failings we find that there was maladministration.
32. The landlord’s compensation policy says it will offer compensation where it fails to follow its policies and procedures, or guidelines, and this has a negative impact on the resident. It will aware compensation where it fails to respond or process a complaint within agreed response times and did not comply with our Complaint Handling Code. It will also consider the impact of any failures in its complaint handling and where it has not complied with our code.
33. Based on the landlord’s policy and the failings identified, it has not followed its policies and the complaint handling code around the resident’s complaint. We order that the landlord pay the resident compensation.

Determination (decision)

34. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration with the landlord’s handling of:
    1. Heat loss in a bedroom in the resident’s property.
    2. The complaint.

Orders

35. Within 4 weeks of this report, the landlord must:
    1. Provide the resident with an apology around the failings found in this report.
    2. Pay the resident compensation of £400. We break this down as:
       1. £300 for its handling of the resident’s heat loss concerns.
       2. £100 for its handling of the complaint.
    3. Provide proof of compliance with these orders.
36. Due to the time which has passed since the resident raised her concerns, within 6 weeks of this report the landlord must:
    1. Inspect the property and explain how it intends to ensure the temperature of the bedroom is within the appropriate range. This could be for example, by carrying out a thermal imaging report, completing any outstanding repairs to the windows, installing radiators, or any other actions it deems appropriate. The landlord should explain its findings and how it plans to address the issue to the resident and us. It must explain if it is a repair matter or classed as an improvement.