London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202341926)
|
Decision |
|
|
Case ID |
202341926 |
|
Decision type |
Investigation |
|
Landlord |
London & Quadrant Housing Trust |
|
Landlord type |
Housing Association |
|
Occupancy |
Assured Tenancy |
|
Date |
17 March 2026 |
Background
- The resident experienced noise transfer from the neighbour living above her in a property with hard flooring. The resident and her representative contacted the landlord about its handling of her noise reports which was the subject of her complaints. We have referred to the representative and the resident as ‘the resident’.
What the complaint is about
- The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
- The resident’s reports of noise transference.
- The resident’s complaint.
Our decision (determination)
- We found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of:
- The resident’s reports of noise transference.
- The resident’s complaint.
We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.
Summary of reasons
The handling of the resident’s noise transference reports
- The landlord decided the resident’s noise reports were general living noise. It agreed to install carpets and repair flooring in the upstairs property. Its compensation offer was not proportionate to the time, trouble, distress, and inconvenience it caused the resident.
The resident’s complaint
- The landlord did not apply its complaint policy correctly. It apologised for its complaint handling delays and offered the resident compensation. However, its offer was not proportionate to the time and trouble it caused the resident.
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 14 April 2026 |
|
2 |
Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £675 made up as follows:
The landlord must pay this directly to the resident by the due date. It may deduct any payments it has already made. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. |
No later than 14 April 2026 |
|
3 |
Inspection order The landlord must contact the resident to arrange an inspection. It must take all reasonable steps to ensure it completes the inspection by the due date. Someone suitably qualified must complete the inspection of the type needed. 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.
What the inspection must achieve: The landlord must ensure that the surveyor inspects the floorboards, joists, and structure of the property considering the noise transfer issues between the properties.
The survey report must set out:
|
No later than 14 April 2026 |
|
4 |
ASB Order The landlord must contact the resident about her reports of noise transference. Consider if it should open a new case and respond in line with its ASB policy and procedures. Update the resident with its decision and any action plan it agrees in writing. |
No later than 14 April 2026 |
Recommendations
Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.
|
Our recommendations |
|
We recommend the landlord contacts the resident’s neighbour about its plans to install carpet in their property. |
Our investigation
The complaint procedure
|
Date |
What happened |
|
24 September 2024 |
The resident raised a stage 1 complaint. She said she experienced noise since moving into the property in March 2021, and that it affected her mental health and work. She said the upstairs property had hard flooring and the noise came from using a washing machine after 9pm, knocking, banging, talking loudly, shouting, and playing music late at night. She said the landlord had investigated, and nailed down loose flooring, but the creaking continued and the situation had not improved. She also said the neighbours had not fitted carpet as the landlord had asked. She said she could not use the landlord’s noise app but it had reviewed recordings from her phone. She referred to the tenancy agreement and said the landlord should resolve the situation. |
|
4 December 2023 |
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s stage 1 complaint |
|
19 March 2024 |
The landlord sent the resident its stage 1 response. It said it had visited her neighbour to check the noise, which it categorised as household noise. It said it could not make the neighbour install carpets, but it would contact the resident soon about the issues. It asked her to use its noise app to record any noise so it could review it. The landlord apologised for its delayed response and offered her £90 for distress and inconvenience, £90 for time and trouble, and £25 for its complaint handling delay, totalling £205. |
|
25 March 2024 |
The resident escalated her complaint. She said she did not agree that stomping and using household equipment at night was household noise. She said her neighbour knew the noise was affecting her sleep but had not changed her behaviour which she believed was antisocial behaviour (ASB). She accepted the building was old and said she was surprised the landlord could not make the resident fit carpets. She also said its compensation offer did not reflect the impact the noise had on her family for 3 years. She said the landlord should use the money if offered her to fix the floorboards and lay carpets which she felt would be more helpful. |
|
8 April 2024 |
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s stage 2 complaint |
|
3 May 2024 |
The landlord sent the resident its final complaint response. It said it had visited the neighbour to understand the issues and reminded her verbally and in writing about the impact of her noise on the resident. It acknowledged the significant impact the noise had on the resident, apologised, and suggested she consider swapping her rooms around. It said it had raised a job for a carpenter to inspect the creaking floorboards, assess any issues with the joists, and carry out repairs. It explained a roof leak meant it could not arrange carpets, but it would get quotes to carpet the upstairs property to help with soundproofing. It asked the resident to record noise and send this so it could review the situation and decide whether to open a new ASB case. It provided links to support agencies, upheld the complaint, and offered an extra £60 for distress and inconvenience, and £20 for its delayed stage 2 response, totalling £285. |
|
Referral to the Ombudsman |
The resident asked us to investigate. She said the landlord should fit carpets in the upstairs flat and reduce noise transference issues. |
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 noise transference reports |
|
Finding |
Maladministration |
What we have not investigated
- The resident said this situation had a detrimental impact on her health and wellbeing. It would be fairer, more reasonable, and more effective for the resident to make a personal injury claim for any injury caused. The courts can deal with this type of dispute as they have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide on the cause of any injury and how long it will last. We can decide if a landlord should pay compensation for distress and inconvenience.
What we have investigated
- In ASB cases our role is not to investigate if a complaint is ASB but to consider the landlord’s handling of the resident’s report of ASB.
- The resident reported noise transfer problems to the landlord in December 2021. It acknowledged her reports and sent her diary sheets to complete. This met its ASB policy which says it will give advice and support to help residents gather evidence about noise.
- There was no further action until the resident sent in a noise diary covering 8 August 2022 to 5 September 2022. The landlord logged the records and said it would open an ASB case but it did not contact the resident. This caused her time and trouble chasing it on 24 November 2022. The landlord had still not contacted her before 3 January 2023 when she reported she had not received any updates or responses to sound recordings she had sent.
- On 23 February 2023, the landlord sent an internal email saying it had spoken to the resident, who felt it had forgotten her case. It said it had reviewed her diary sheets and decided the noise she reported was general household noise. The landlord contacted her neighbour 2 working days later, to discuss the concerns. However, it missed the opportunity to manage the resident’s expectations by explaining what it could and could not do about the noise.
- Between March and May 2023, the resident reported ongoing noise issues that she said affected her health and wellbeing. The landlord agreed to contact her each week, asked her to use its noise app, and visited her at home on 25 May 2023 to review her recordings. It then arranged a noise test between the properties on 12 June 2023 which allowed it to hear the impact and level of noise itself.
- The landlord wrote to the resident to confirm it had heard some noise transfer between the properties but decided the issues were due to lifestyle differences and did not amount to ASB. However, it accepted the noise was affecting the resident and agreed to carpet the upstairs property. It also repaired some of the creaking floorboards in July 2023.
- The landlord suggested mediation to give the neighbours chance to discuss the noise and their lifestyle differences. However, the resident’s neighbour declined this offer.
- On 20 August 2023, the landlord wrote to the neighbour about the noise issues affecting the resident below. It explained that her tenancy agreement only allowed carpet or heavy-duty vinyl because she lived above another property. It said it would pay for new carpet in her property and reminded her about the impact of noise transfer on the resident below. It is unclear why the landlord did not refer to the tenancy terms about flooring when the resident first reported the noise issues.
- The landlord acknowledged the resident’s ongoing concerns about floorboard repairs on 16 and 23 August 2023 and agreed to arrange a supervisor to visit, as she requested. When it visited on 26 October 2023, it found potential joist issues in the property. Its delay investigating this caused the resident further distress and inconvenience living below the flooring problem.
- On 24 October 2023, the landlord acknowledged that the resident was still experiencing noise issues. It asked whether she had completed diary sheets, kept recordings, and uploaded them to the noise app. This caused her to question why the landlord asked for more evidence when it had not resolved the issues using the evidence she already sent.
- The landlord reviewed the resident’s noise recordings and emailed her on 3 November 2023 to confirm its surveyor would carry out a full assessment of the property. However, it delayed the carpet installation further which increased the distress and inconvenience the resident experienced.
- The landlord closed the resident’s ASB case on 6 November 2023 based upon its assessment of the noise levels and the recordings she had sent. It summarised its investigation to help her understand its reasons. Its decision to close the case as the noise was general living noise was in line with its ASB policy. However, it missed the opportunity to say when it would install the carpets, repair the joists, or when it would provide this information.
- The landlord’s assessment that the noise was general household noise affected how it handled the case. It recognised the noise was persistent and caused the resident distress and inconvenience.
- In its stage 1 complaint response the landlord repeated that the noise was not ASB and said it could not force the neighbour to install carpets. However, this was confusing considering it already confirmed her tenancy agreement did not allow hard flooring and it had agreed to pay for carpets. The landlord accepted that its handling of the noise issues caused the resident time, trouble, distress, and inconvenience. It upheld her complaint and offered her £180 in compensation.
- In its final complaint response, the landlord increased its offer to £245 and explained it could not install the carpet because the upstairs property needed further repairs. It repeated the actions it had taken and said it would consider opening a new ASB case if the resident provided more evidence. It also gave advice about other support available.
- The landlord did not acknowledge its poor and conflicting communication. It missed the opportunity to act sooner on the neighbour’s tenancy agreement and reconsider whether the noise issues amounted to ASB. Taking this into account, the landlord’s compensation offer was not proportionate to the time, trouble, distress, and inconvenience the resident experienced over an unreasonable timeframe. Overall, we found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of noise transference.
- We have ordered the landlord to apologise to the resident and pay her an extra £255, totalling £500. This is in line with our remedies guidance where the landlord has not resolved the complaint or fully recognised the time, trouble, distress, and inconvenience caused to the resident.
- In March 2026, the resident reported ongoing issues with noise, hard flooring, and no carpets in the upstairs property. We have ordered the landlord to reinspect the property and complete any repairs related to noise transfer between the properties. We have also recommended it to contact the resident’s neighbour about installing carpet.
|
Complaint |
The handling of the complaint |
|
Finding |
Maladministration |
- The landlord’s complaint policy says it will respond to stage 1 complaint within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days. It also says it will acknowledge complaints within 5 working days. This is in line with our Complaint Handling Code (the Code).
- The resident chased the landlord’s stage 1 response on 3 and 28 November 2023. It acknowledged the stage 1 complaint on 4 December 2023. This was 66 working days later than its complaint policy target. Its stage 1 complaint responsewas 113 working days later than its complaint policy timeframe.
- The landlord did not agree new target response dates with the resident in line with the Code. The resident escalated her complaint on 11 March 2024 before the landlord sent its stage 1 response.
- She escalated her complaint again on 25 March 2024. The landlord acknowledged the stage 2 complaint 9 working days later than its complaint policy. Its final response was 19 working days later than its complaint policy timeframe.
- The landlord upheld the resident’s complaints and apologised for its complaint handling delays. However, it did not say what learning it took from the complaint and its offer of £45 compensation was not proportionate to the time and trouble it caused to the resident. Overall, we found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.
- We have ordered the landlord to pay the resident an extra £135 compensation, totalling £175. This award is in keeping with our remedies guidance for maladministration which caused time and trouble to the resident.
Learning
- The landlord should learn from this complaint. It should agree an extension to its complaint response dates with residents when it will miss its complaint response target date.
Knowledge information management (record keeping)
- The landlord did not provide us with evidence of the resident’s March 2023 diary sheets. It should learn from this complaint to ensure it keeps clear and complete records and it can provide them when asked.
Communication
- The landlord’s communication was reasonable and it attempted to keep the resident up to date on its actions and investigations.