London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202339416)

Decision
Case ID	202339416
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	London & Quadrant Housing Trust
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	20 October 2025

Background

1. The resident lives in a 1-bedroom ground floor flat. She has mental and physical health conditions. The landlord has recorded these vulnerabilities. The resident has complained about the lack of ventilation, condensation and damp and mould in the property. She has also complained that the paving slabs in her garden are uneven. She explained both are health and safety issues due to her health conditions.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. the resident’s reports of ventilation issues, condensation and damp and mould in the property.
   2. repairs to uneven paving slabs in the garden.
3. We have also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

4. There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of:
   1. the resident’s reports of ventilation issues, condensation and damp and mould in the property.
   2. repairs to uneven paving slabs in the garden.
5. There was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

6. We found that:

The handling of the resident’s reports of ventilation issues, condensation and damp and mould in the property

1. The landlord completed some actions in line with its repairs and damp and mould policies. However, it did not repair the windows within a reasonable time, and it is unclear if it has completed these repairs due to its poor record keeping. It failed to explore ways to reduce condensation when the resident first reported this, did not keep the resident updated and did not assess whether to replace the windows outside its planned works. It offered compensation for its handling of the resident’s reports. However, it did not acknowledge all its failings in its complaint responses and the resident reports that the issues remain unresolved.

The handling of repairs to uneven paving slabs in the garden

2. The landlord delayed in attending to the repair until 13 June 2023 despite the resident reraising it on 29 March 2023. It failed to keep accurate records including reasons for postponed inspections and their outcomes. It also did not inform the resident of the planned repairs before its contractor attended. It delayed in relaying information from the Occupational Therapists (OT) report to the resident. It offered some compensation for its handling of these repairs but did not acknowledge all its failings. The resident has said that the paving slabs remain unsafe.

The landlord’s complaint handling

3. The landlord sent its stage 1 response and acknowledged the resident’s escalation in February 2023 in accordance with the Complaint Handling Code (the Code) and its complaint policy. However, it did not provide a stage 2 response at that time. It slightly exceeded its timescale to provide a stage 1 response on 4 July 2023, when the resident made another complaint, and significantly delayed escalating this. It acknowledged its complaint handling failures and offered compensation for this. However, it is unclear if the landlord acknowledged its failure to provide a stage 2 response when the resident first complained.

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	The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure: the apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. it has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 18 November 2025
2	The landlord must pay the resident £300 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the resident’s reports of condensation and damp and mould in the property. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date.	No later than 18 November 2025
3	The landlord must contact the resident to arrange an inspection. It must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. The inspection must be completed by a suitably qualified person. If the landlord cannot gain access to complete the inspection, it must provide us with documentary evidence of its attempts to inspect the property no later than the due date.   The landlord must ensure that the surveyor: inspects the resident’s property and produces a written report with photographs. inspects the paving slabs in the garden and produces a written report with photographs. The survey reports must set out: the most likely cause of the condensation and damp and mould in the property. whether the landlord would replace the windows separately from any planned programmes of work. If it will not do this the report must outline the reasons to the resident including the dates of any planned programmes of work. whether the paving slabs are safe considering the resident’s vulnerabilities. whether the landlord is responsible to repair or resolve the issues together with reasons where it is not responsible. a full scope of works to achieve a lasting and effective repair to the issues (if the landlord is responsible). the likely timescales to commence and complete the work and / or any repairs in the interim. whether temporary alternative accommodation is necessary either because of the condition of the property or during the works.	No later than 18 November 2025

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
3 February 2023	The resident raised a complaint. She said: the property lacked ventilation due to a broken bathroom extractor fan, no kitchen extractor fan and windows she could not open. This caused condensation and high humidity. the moisture had caused the bathroom paint to peel. she wanted the landlord to provide humidity sensor readings, install a kitchen extractor fan, repair the bathroom extractor fan, and replace the old windows. The landlord provided its stage 1 decision. It said it: had attended to repair the kitchen window on 5 January 2023, but needed 2 operatives, so it scheduled a follow-up for 16 February 2023. would repair the extractor fan in the bathroom on 9 February 2023. would not install a kitchen extractor fan as this would be an improvement and not a repair.   The resident disputed the decision not to install a kitchen extractor fan, citing health and safety concerns. She also complained about the delay in repairing the windows. She said the landlord failed to address issues with humidity, condensation and ventilation. She said it did not provide an update on the humidity sensor readings.
6 February 2023	The landlord escalated her complaint to stage 2.
16 February 2023	The resident continued to complain about the humidity and condensation in the property. She said she was constantly wiping the windows down.   The landlord updated the resident. It said it had repaired the extractor fan and rescheduled the kitchen window repair from 16 February 2023 to 15 March 2023.
14 June 2023	The resident complained that the contractor had not completed the requested garden work. She said the landlord needed concrete to level the area where she had a recent fall and the garden was unsafe.   The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint. It said it was investigating the completed work and would provide a written outcome by 28 June 2023.
18 June 2023	The resident submitted 2 more complaints. She repeated her concerns about unfinished garden works. She said the landlord delayed in approving these works. She continued to complain about the windows and condensation and humidity in the property. She requested that the landlord and contractor agreed on the work to be completed before the contractor attended. She said she wanted compensation for stress and anxiety.
04 July 2023	The landlord provided a stage 1 response. It apologised for the issues with the garden works. It said it: had rebooked the inspection for 19 July 2023 to see if the work completed matched the work it requested. would manage any additional work itself. trusted this was in order and would close the complaint. The resident said she was not satisfied. She asked the landlord to keep the complaint open as it cancelled the inspection and the previous appointment did not go as planned.
13 and 21 October 2023	The resident complained that the landlord had instructed its contractor to complete different works in the garden to what it had told her. She said they only planned to replace part of the patio, despite the landlord telling her it would fully replace this.
09 November 2023	The landlord acknowledged the resident’s stage 2 complaint. It apologised for the delay in escalating.
01 December 2023	The landlord provided its stage 2 response. It said: it would not remove a flowerbed as an OT report did not recommend this. It accepted that it could have communicated this better to the resident. the January 2023 healthy homes report recommended repairs to a broken extractor fan, windows and mould. It completed all repairs except the windows at the time. it completed a mould wash on 17 November 2023 and repaired pointing on external walls and applied brick sealer on 23 November 2023. it had previously visited to address swollen window frames and windows not opening and acknowledged the impact this had on humidity. it rescheduled the sash cord repairs and installation of vents to the windows from February 2024 to 30 November 2023. It trusted the repairs were completed satisfactorily. it had not included the windows in its upcoming planned works programmes. it upheld the complaint and was sorry for delays and the need for the resident chase progress. It awarded the following compensation: loss of outdoor space: £395. distress for failure to recognise the impact due to vulnerabilities: £300. inconvenience for failure to recognise the impact due to vulnerabilities: £300. time and effort getting the complaint resolved: £150. poor complaint handling: £100. total: £1,245.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident asked us to investigate, seeking repairs completed to the required standard, a manager’s assessment of all issues and compensation. She said: the external wall repairs did not resolve the issue; her windows did not open and there continued to be condensation throughout the property. the bathroom extractor fan did not work, and the surveyor recommended work but had not identified the root of the problem. the landlord was in the process of repairing the paving slabs, but she had to chase for appointments.

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	The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports about ventilation issues, condensation and damp and mould in the property.
Finding	Maladministration

What we did not investigate

7. The resident has said that the issues had affected her health. Unlike a court we cannot establish what caused the health issue or determine liability. This would usually be dealt with as a personal injury claim. The resident can obtain independent advice if she wishes. However, where we have identified failure on the landlord’s part, we can consider the resulting distress and inconvenience.

What we did investigate

8. The landlord completed a healthy homes assessment in January 2023 in line with its damp and mould policy. It completed a repair to the extractor fan in the bathroom on 9 February 2023. This was in line with its repairs policy.
9. The landlord did not complete repairs to the windows within a reasonable timeframe. It would be unreasonable to consider this a routine repair for the landlord to complete within its 25-calendar day aim for routine repairs. However, the landlord’s records show that it raised repairs for the windows on 5 January 2023 and this issue was ongoing 14 months later. The landlord postponed appointments for the windows but did not always inform the resident in advance or provide an explanation. It is unclear if it has completed these repairs.
10. In its stage 1 response, the landlord said it would not install an extractor fan in the kitchen as this would be an improvement. This was in line with the Landlord and Tenant Act (LATA) 1985. However, the landlord did not address the resident’s concerns about condensation or humidity in the property. It could have explored options to reduce this. It did not update the resident on the humidity readings in the property. The landlord told the resident on 22 February 2023 that its healthy homes team monitored this and would contact her if there were any issues. It could have requested that the healthy homes team contacted the resident to discuss her concerns.
11. The resident contacted the landlord on 17 March, 18 June and 14 and 18 September 2023. She reported mould in her bathroom, continued to raise concerns about condensation and humidity and requested an update on outstanding repairs including to the windows and repointing. The landlord did not update the resident following any of these contacts from her.
12. The contractor attended to complete repointing on 13 October 2023 but was unable to due to confusion over other jobs it planned to complete. The resident reported damp in her bathroom on 2 November 2023. The landlord raised a job for this and a new job for repointing on 9 November 2023. It completed a mould wash on 17 November and the repointing job on 23 November 2023 in line with its repairs and damp and mould policies.
13. In its stage 2 response, the landlord acknowledged that the windows in the property stuck and could not be opened. It said that it had not included the windows in upcoming planned works programmes. The landlord had raised repairs for the vents in the windows. However, each case requires an independent review of the resident’s and property’s needs. The landlord had acknowledged that the resident could not open the windows. Therefore, it would have been reasonable for it to carry out window replacements outside its planned works programmes if it was necessary to do so based on the condition of the resident’s property.
14. Throughout the complaint there were issues with the landlord’s record keeping, with jobs marked as complete but no information provided of the action taken. Additionally, the landlord cancelled a job raised for the windows noting that it had “looked at” this under another maintenance reference. However, there was no further mention of this reference in the maintenance records.
15. The landlord offered £600 in total for distress and inconvenience caused by its failure to recognise the impact on the resident due to her vulnerabilities. The landlord’s records show that the resident has confirmed she received the cheque for the compensation offered. The landlord did not break this amount down.
16. Based on the evidence provided we have concluded that it attributed half of this amount to the issues with condensation and damp and mould. We consider that the £300 paid did not fully recognise the distress, inconvenience and upset caused by the landlord’s handling of the condensation and damp and mould in the resident’s property.
17. The landlord completed mould treatment in the bathroom in April 2024, and it requested another in July 2024. We have seen no evidence to confirm that the landlord has resolved the issue and put things right.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of repairs to uneven paving slabs in the garden.
Finding	Maladministration

18. The landlord raised a repair for the paving slabs on 17 March 2023. The resident contacted the landlord on 29 March 2023. She reported that the contractor had visited but asked her to raise the job again due to an incorrect description. Between March and May, the resident chased the landlord for a start date and reported that she had fallen. The landlord did not acknowledge this or confirm with the resident if it needed to provide details about its liability insurance. Given the resources required, it would be unreasonable to treat this repair as routine under the landlord’s policy. However, the landlord’s contractor did not return until 13 June 2023. This was an unreasonable delay.
19. On 14 June 2023 the resident reported that the landlord’s contractor had not completed the requested work. The landlord contacted its contractor who confirmed it had completed the work instructed. The landlord did not clarify the work it would complete to the resident. The landlord arranged an inspection on 28 June 2023 but cancelled this due to staff sickness. It proposed 30 June 2023 instead. The landlord’s stage 1 response shows that it had postponed this to 19 July 2023. However, its records show a meeting with the surveyor had been moved to September 2023. It is unclear if this was the same inspection and the landlord has not provided any details of this.
20. The resident contacted the landlord on 13 and 21 October 2023. She reported that the landlord had instructed its contractor to complete work different to what she had requested. Records show she expected the landlord to remove a flower bed and replace the patio. The landlord did not clarify the planned work with the resident prior to its contractor attending. The landlord received an OT report on 31 October 2023. It did not recommend removing the flower bed. In line with its Aids and Adaptations Policy the landlord informed the resident on 23 November 2023 that it would not be doing this.
21. In its stage 2 response, the landlord offered £395 compensation for loss of outdoor space and £600 for distress and inconvenience. The landlord did not break the £600 down. Based on the evidence provided we have concluded that it attributed half of this to the issues with the paving slab repairs. Therefore, the landlord offered a total of £695. The resident confirmed to the landlord she has received the cheque for this. We consider that this appropriately reflects the distress and inconvenience caused and have therefore not ordered further compensation.
22. The landlord acknowledged that it could have shared the OT report findings sooner. However, it did not acknowledge all its failings in its complaint responses including failing to confirm the planned work with the resident before its contractor attended and delays in starting the work.
23. Its contractor completed work in the garden on 15 February 2024 following receipt of an OT’s recommendation to remove a flower bed. The resident complained to the landlord that its contractor had relayed the existing slabs which differed to what it agreed. The landlord’s records show that it arranged for its surveyor to inspect this on 4 April 2024.  There is no record of the outcome of this. The landlord completed further work in the garden in April 2024. However, the resident has said the issue remains unresolved and she is concerned about the health and safety of the paving slabs.

Complaint	The landlord’s complaint handling.
Finding	Service failure

24. The resident submitted a complaint on 3 February 2023. The same day the landlord sent its stage 1 response, and the resident asked to escalate it. The landlord acknowledged this on 6 February 2023. Up to this point the landlord followed its complaint policy and the Code. However, it failed to issue a stage 2 response.
25. The resident raised another complaint on 14 June 2023. The landlord acknowledged this the same day. It sent its stage 1 response on 4 July 2023. This was slightly over the 10-working day timeframe stated in its complaint policy and the Code. The resident said she was not satisfied the same day. The landlord did not escalate this complaint until 9 November 2023 after further complaints. This was significantly more than the timeframe set out in its complaint policy and the Code.
26. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 1 December 2023. It offered £250 for its complaint handling failures. It is positive that the landlord acknowledged these. However, it is unclear if it included its failure to provide a stage 2 response when the resident first complained in February 2023 in this. The resident confirmed she received the cheque. The offer aligns with our remedies guidance and fairly reflects the distress and inconvenience caused. Therefore we have not ordered further compensation.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

27. Some of the landlord’s repair records are unclear and do not detail the outcome of the works completed. At times, this has impacted our ability to assess its actions. It also failed to provide a stage 2 response when the resident first complained in February 2023.

Communication

28. The landlord failed to keep the resident updated on outstanding repairs. It also failed to inform the resident about the planned works before its contractor attended. This led to delays in completing repairs. It could have confirmed the work it planned to complete with the resident to manage her expectations.