London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202342486)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202342486

London & Quadrant Housing Trust

30 September 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. This complaint is about the landlord’s handling of repairs to the extractor fan and its response to the resident’s additional concerns.
  2. We have also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, which is a housing association. She has lived at the property, which is a 1 bedroom flat since 1995.
  2. The resident had a previous complaint with the landlord in September 2022. This was regarding its decision to add a ‘caution flag’ to the resident’s account indicating that staff should only attend the property in pairs. This was due to an alleged altercation between her and an operative of the landlord.
  3. The resident reported an issue with her kitchen extractor fan on 4 October 2023. On 19 October 2023, the landlord told the resident it had booked an appointment for 2 operatives to attend on 6 November 2023. The landlord cancelled this appointment on 6 November 2023 and rearranged this for 21 November 2023. On 20 November 2023, the landlord rearranged the appointment again for 1 December 2023.
  4. The resident complained to the landlord on 20 November 2023 regarding its handling of the repair. She expressed dissatisfaction with how it had handled phone calls made by her to the landlord on 19 October 2023 and the need for 2 operatives to attend. She explained how the issue impacted her and asked the landlord to complete a full investigation into her concerns.
  5. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 21 November 2023. It apologised for the length of time it was taking to complete the repair. It said it would ensure the repair was completed on 1 December 2023. It said she could discuss her concerns about the need for 2 operatives to attend with its Housing Officer. The landlord offered the resident £60 compensation for the inconvenience caused and the 2 missed appointments.
  6. The resident escalated her complaint on 21 November 2023 as she was dissatisfied with the landlord’s response. She complained it had not followed its complaint process and had failed to address all the concerns she had raised. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint on 1 December 2023 by email. It also completed the repair to the extractor fan on this date. The resident replied to the landlord on 2 December 2023 and confirmed her complaint points.
  7. The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response on 22 December 2023. It apologised for the delay in it completing repairs. It provided responses to the complaint points the resident raised and upheld her complaint. It offered compensation totalling £410, which included £50 for poor complaint handling.
  8. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and asked us to investigate her complaint.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. In correspondence to us and the landlord, the resident explained she believed the landlord has engaged in harassing, victimising, and discriminatory behaviour against her. These allegations if proven, could amount to a crime, or as are a legal matter which is better suited to the courts to decide. Therefore, they fall outside of the scope of this investigation because they cannot be decided upon by our Service. Nonetheless, we can consider whether the landlord responded fairly and appropriately to the concerns raised by the resident.
  2. Our Scheme states we may not re-investigate a complaint that we have previously made a decision on.
  3. In March 2024 we investigated a complaint from the resident concerning the landlord’s decision to add a caution flag to her account indicating that staff should only attend the property in pairs. In this complaint the resident has raised dissatisfaction about the same matter. This investigation will not re-assess the landlord’s decision to place a caution flag on the resident’s account. Instead, we will only assess the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns the flag remained on her account and her request for to it remove the flag.
  4. In addition, we note the resident has provided a significant number of documents to us regarding her complaints against the landlord. This investigation will not address each specific issue or concern the resident has raised. A number of her concerns relate to issues that she did not raise as part of this complaint and either relate to her previous complaint or have not been through the landlord’s complaint process.
  5. Our Scheme states we may not investigate matters that have not exhausted the landlord’s complaints process. This is because landlords must have the opportunity to respond to complaints before our involvement and be given the opportunity to put things right if there have been failings in its service provision.
  6. This investigation will therefore focus on the landlord’s actions between 4 October 2023 and 22 December 2023. This being the date of the first issue that gave rise to the complaint that was raised with the landlord, through to when the landlord issued its stage 2 response.
  7. If the resident remains dissatisfied with matters that are out of scope for this investigation, which we have previously not investigated, she would need to raise this directly with the landlord to allow it the opportunity to respond to the complaint. If she remains dissatisfied once the landlord has investigated her new complaints, she can then ask us to investigate them.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the extractor fan and its response to the resident’s additional concerns

  1. The resident reported a fault with her kitchen extractor fan on 4 October 2023 using the landlord’s webform. The resident received an automated acknowledgement email from the landlord stating it aimed to respond within 5-working days. The resident emailed the landlord on 12 October 2023 chasing a response. It replied saying it had asked its maintenance team to arrange an appointment. The resident called the landlord chasing an appointment on 17 October 2023.
  2. On 19 October 2023, the landlord called the resident to advise her it had booked an appointment for 6 November 2023. It advised her 2 operatives would attend the appointment. The resident asked why 2 operatives would attend but the landlord’s operative was unable to explain the reason.
  3. The evidence shows the resident had further calls with the landlord on this date regarding the reason for 2 operatives attending and whether there was a caution flag on her account. The last operative she spoke to said they could not see whether there was a caution flag on her account, which the resident questioned. The resident asked to speak to a manager on the calls, but the operatives told her no managers were available. The resident also asked about appointments it completed earlier in the year where only one operative attended, but the landlord said it could not provide further details.
  4. On 6 November 2023, the landlord cancelled and rearranged the repair appointment for 21 November 2023. The resident emailed the landlord to express her dissatisfaction at it cancelling this appointment. She asked for the names of the operatives attending the next appointment. The landlord provided this information on 15 November 2023 when the resident called it. It then emailed the resident on 16 November 2023. It said it had logged her negative feedback regarding the cancelled appointment. The landlord said it had arranged to send the resident a £20 voucher. The resident responded to say she did not want the voucher and if it cancelled the repair again, she would make a formal complaint.
  5. On 20 November 2023, the landlord cancelled and rearranged the repair appointment for 1 December 2023.
  6. The resident complained to the landlord on 20 November 2023 about its handling of the repair. She expressed her dissatisfaction with the cancelled appointments and asked questions about why these did not go ahead. The resident explained how the cancellations and  the need to have 2 operatives attend had impacted her. She complained about the conduct of the landlord’s staff members she spoke to on 19 October 2023. The resident said she considered the landlord had learned nothing from the Housing Ombudsman special investigation into it and had demonstrated no improvement in its repair handling. She asked it to investigate and provide a full response to her concerns.
  7. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 21 November 2023. It apologised for the length of time it was taking to complete the repair and the 2 missed appointments. It said it would ensure the repair went ahead on 1 December 2023. The landlord said if the resident had concerns about the need for 2 operatives to be in attendance, she could discuss the matter with its housing officer. It offered compensation of £60 for the 2 missed appointments and inconvenience caused.
  8. The evidence shows the landlord’s response failed to provide an answer about the resident’s concerns over its staff conduct or address all the issues she had had raised when making her complaint.
  9. The resident escalated her complaint on 21 November 2023. She said the landlord had not addressed all the concerns she raised. She provided details of her calls to the landlord on 19 October 2023. She asked the landlord to listen to the calls. She explained her concerns regarding its policies and the caution flag on her account. The landlord emailed the resident explaining its understanding of her complaint on 1 December 2023.
  10. In response on 2 December 2023, the resident confirmed to the landlord her complaint was regarding:
    1. The missed appointment and the appointment cancellation to repair the kitchen extractor fan.
    2. Interactions with two members of staff on 19 October 2023
    3. It’s contradicting policies, procedures, and practices
    4. It’s poor internal communication and data sharing practices.
    5. Its failure to learn from her previous formal complaints, and the Housing Ombudsman’s “Special Investigation” on it.
    6. Lack of transparent communication from it in relation to the caution flag.
  11. The landlord completed the repair to the resident’s extractor fan on 1 December 2023. The landlord’s repair policy states it aims to complete a routine repair in an average of 25 calendar days. It took the landlord 56 days to complete the repair, which was outside the average timescale of its policy. The length of time taken for the landlord to complete the repair was unreasonable. This caused the resident time and trouble due to the missed appointments and overall time taken to complete the repair.
  12. The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response on 22 December 2023. It acknowledged it had cancelled 2 appointments. It said this was to accommodate an emergency repair and resulting resourcing challenges. It apologised for the delay to complete the repair and the impact this had on the resident.
  13. The landlord explained it had listened to the telephone calls from 19 October 2023. It detailed its review of the recordings and acknowledged the frustration felt by the resident as the first 2 operatives she spoke to were unable to answer her questions about the caution flag. In addition, the landlord acknowledged the frustration that no manager was available to escalate the matter to. The landlord said its operative provided incorrect information to the resident during her final call. It explained it had fed this information, along with how its operatives handled the calls back to the relevant managers to address. It apologised to the resident for how the handling of the calls made her feel.
  14. In relation to its internal communication and data sharing practices, the landlord acknowledged the incorrect information it provided on 19 October 2023. It said it was in the process of investing in new systems that would improve how it shared information between departments and its communication with residents.
  15. The landlord thanked the resident for reading the “Special Investigation” report on it published by us in July 2023. It said it had a 5-year improvement action plan and explained the process it had in place to manage this plan. The landlord said it would not be appropriate for it to comment on complaints she had previously escalated to us.
  16. Regarding the caution flag, the landlord acknowledged the impact and damage its handling of this issue had caused. It said it had raised the resident’s concerns to the relevant management. It said it regretted it had not reviewed the flag sooner and confirmed it had removed this from her tenancy record.
  17. In its response, the landlord told the resident there were actions from her complaint it would raise internally to the relevant stakeholders and decision-makers for ongoing learning and development opportunities. It explained this related to providing accurate and consistent advice to consumers, improvements in its communication, improving the process regarding caution flags and continued investment in resources and training for complaint handlers. The landlord offered the resident compensation totalling £360.
  18. While the landlord’s response did not address every specific point or concern the resident raised, its response was proportionate and reasonably addressed the overall complaint issues. It acknowledged failings, the learning it had identified and what actions it would take to improve. It took appropriate steps to resolve the issue with the caution flag by removing it from the account and apologising for its failure to review the matter sooner.
  19. The landlord demonstrated it listened back to calls made on 19 October 2023. It acknowledged inaccuracies in the information it provided and failures in the way it handled them.
  20. However, the landlord response did not explain what incorrect information its operative provided on the third call. This was a missed opportunity for the landlord to provide a clearer explanation, rather than assume the resident was aware of what information it was referring to.
  21. When a failure is identified, as in this case, our role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this we take into account whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: Be Fair, Put Things Right and Learn from Outcomes as well as our own guidance on remedies.
  22. It was appropriate for the landlord to acknowledge and apologise for its failures and to demonstrate it had identified learning from its failings. The landlord offered the resident compensation totalling £360. This amount was proportionate to the level of failing and demonstrated its appreciation of the effect of those failings upon the resident. The compensation offer was in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance where there was a failure which had an adverse impact on the resident.
  23. Overall, the landlord has taken appropriate steps to acknowledge, apologise and put things right. The landlord’s recognition of the impact its failings had on the resident, along with its apology and financial redress, reasonably put things right and resolved the complaint. This leads to a finding of reasonable redress, in that the landlord has made an offer which satisfactorily resolved the complaint.

The landlord’s complaint handling

  1. The resident complained to the landlord on 20 November 2023. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) states when a complaint is logged at stage 1, the landlord must set out their understanding of the complaint and the outcome the resident is seeking. It also states the landlord must address all points raised in the complaint definition and provide clear reasons for any decisions. The landlord’s complaint policy states it will investigate all elements of the complaint.
  2. In response to the resident’s complaint, the landlord did not set out its understanding of the resident’s complaint before providing a response. When it provided its stage 1 complaint response on 21 November 2023, it did not address or respond to all the issues the resident had raised. This was unreasonable, as the landlord did not act in line with the Code or its complaints policy.
  3. In her stage 2 escalation on 21 November 2023, the resident complained that the landlord had failed to complete a full investigation. She said it had breached its complaint policy. Before providing its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord contacted the resident on 1 December 2023 to confirm its understanding of complaint. This was an appropriate action for the landlord to take.
  4. The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response on 22 December 2023. It acknowledged it did not respond to all the concerns the resident raised at stage 1 and that its response showed a lack of care and consideration. It said it had escalated the resident’s concerns regarding its response to ensure it continued to learn from complaints it received. The landlord apologised and offered the resident £50 for its complaint handling failures.
  5. It was appropriate and in line with our Dispute Resolution Principles for the landlord to acknowledge, apologise and identify learning from its failures. The landlord’s offer of £50 compensation was in line with an amount which would be calculated using our remedies guidance where there was a failure that caused the resident distress and inconvenience. The amount offered by the landlord was proportionate to the level of its failing in its complaint handling and demonstrated its appreciation of the effect on the resident. This leads to a finding of reasonable redress, in that the landlord has made an offer of redress which resolves the complaint satisfactorily.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord made an offer of redress which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion satisfactorily resolves the resident’s complaint about the landlord’s handling of repairs to the extractor fan and its response to the associated complaint.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord made an offer of redress which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion satisfactorily resolves the resident’s complaint about the landlord’s complaint handling.

Recommendations

  1. If it has not already done so, the landlord should pay the resident the £410 it offered in its stage 2 complaint response.