London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202333027)

Background

1. The resident was permanently rehoused in September 2025. The issues relate to his former property. He reported a roof leak to the landlord in April 2022 which he said caused damp and mould in his daughters’ bedroom. The resident instructed a solicitor in June 2022 and pursued a legal disrepair claim under the pre-action protocol, which it settled in April 2023.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
   1. Reports of a roof leak and associated damp.
   2. Complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We found
   1. The landlord offered reasonable redress for its handling of the resident’s reports of a roof leak and associated damp.
   2. The landlord offered reasonable redress for its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a roof leak and associated damp

4. The landlord did not complete the roof repair in line with its policy timescales. It acknowledged its failings, apologised and offered compensation. The compensation offered and the damages awarded to the resident in his disrepair claim was proportionate.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint

5. There was a delay in the landlord sending its stage 2 response. In its complaint response, it acknowledged its delay and offered appropriate compensation for its failings. 

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

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.

6. The resident told us he had further issues with his roof after the landlord’s repair and its final complaint response. The resident reported these issues in April 2024 and complained to the landlord. He told us the landlord permanently rehoused him as it needed to replace the whole roof. We have already issued a determination on this further roof leak and complaint under case reference 202426266. Therefore, the events we considered in this report are from the resident’s roof leak report in April 2022 up to the landlord’s final complaint response in January 2024.
7. The resident reported a roof leak on 14 April 2022. The landlord arranged an inspection on 29 April 2022 when it also completed a mould wash. This was appropriate and in accordance with its damp and mould policy which says it will assess the property within 20 working days. 
8. Following the inspection, the landlord did not attend again until 6 June 2022. Its record show it attempted a temporary fix on this date by clearing the outlets, which it said managed to slow the leak down to a drip. Although it was reasonable for it to explore a temporary fix until it could complete the repair, it did not do this until after the resident escalated his complaint and nearly 2 months since his initial report. This was unreasonable and likely to have caused the resident distress, and time and trouble in escalating his complaint.
9. On 6 June 2022, as part of his complaint escalation, the resident asked the landlord to temporarily rehouse him until it completed all the work. Its records show it considered this, but it decided it did not need to rehouse the resident at that stage. It communicated this to him on 9 June 2022. It was reasonable for the landlord to consider the resident’s rehousing request, and it responded promptly. Its survey and the joint expert inspection,

completed on 3 August 2022 as part of the disrepair claim, did not find the resident needed to move while it completed work.

10. The landlord’s survey completed in April 2022 identified repairs needed to the roof which was causing a leak into the main bedroom. The joint expert’s report of 25 August 2022 found the landlord needed to carry out work to identify the cause of the leak and carry out the necessary repairs. The report recommended 28 days to organise the repairs and a further 14 days to complete the work. However, the landlord did not complete the roof repair until 21 October 2022. This was not in line with its repairs policy which says it will aim to complete routine repairs within 25 calendar days. Its compensation policy also details its right to repair obligations with the prescribed period for a leaking roof as 7 working days.
11. The landlord’s inspection in April 2022 also found the plaster board in the main front bedroom had crumbled and the walls were damp. It made an urgent recommendation for it to replace the plaster board and replaster. Its damp and mould policy says it will record and raise remedial work identified within 10 working days of its assessment. Although it was reasonable for the landlord to complete the roof repair before it started the internal work, it did not raise the plastering work until 9 January 2023. Its record show it completed this on 13 January 2023 but there was no explanation for the 2-month delay raising the work for plastering. The landlord also failed to update the resident.
12. There were failings in the landlord’s handling of the roof leak and associated damp. In its stage 2 response, the landlord acknowledged this and offered £550 compensation. The landlord and resident told us it agreed the legal disrepair settlement without the involvement of the courts. It awarded the resident £1200 in full and final settlement of his disrepair claim. Therefore, we considered the settlement as part of our assessment of the landlord’s offer. Its total offer of £1750 was proportionate to the failings identified. It is also in line with our remedies guidance for serious failings which had a severe impact on the resident. In view of this, we find the landlord offered reasonable redress for its failures in its handling of the residents reports of a roof leak and associated damp.

13. The landlord responded to the resident’s stage 1 complaint in line with its complaints policy and our complaint handling code (‘the Code’) in use at the time.
14. The resident escalated his complaint on 6 June 2022. The landlord acknowledged this the same day but did not give a timescale of when it would send its stage 2 response. It sent its stage 2 response on 29 January 2024. This delay was inappropriate and far exceeded the timescales of its policy and the Code which says landlords must respond to the stage 2 complaint within 20 working days.
15. In its stage 2 response, the landlord acknowledged its delay responding to the resident’s stage 2 complaint and apologised. It also offered £200 compensation for the delay. Its offer was proportionate to the failing identified and is in line with our remedies guidance for failings which adversely affected the resident. In view of this, we find the landlord offered reasonable redress for its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

16. The landlord’s repair records were poor. It did not provide evidence of when the resident reported the leak, and its repair records did not capture the report details and extent of the leak.  Its repair records confirmed the date it completed the roof repair but there was no post completion report or note of the work it did. The landlord should make sure it records all repair reports accurately and in full on its system.

Communication

17. The landlord’s communication with the resident was poor and it did not keep the resident updated. Its internal notes show it was not aware of when its contractor had attended. It should review how it keeps residents updated and communicates with contractors.