London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202411603)

Decision
Case ID	202411603
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	London & Quadrant Housing Trust
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	11 December 2025

Background

1. The resident complained about damp, mould, and the need for repairs in July 2023. He later brought his complaint to the Ombudsman as he said the landlord had not responded. In his escalated complaint to the landlord, he said he was dissatisfied with the standard of its communication with him in regard to ongoing repairs, and the level of compensation it had offered him.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the:
   1. Landlord’s response to the complaint about its standard of communication.
   2. Landlord’s response to the residents request for compensation in relation to repair works.
   3. Landlords complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

3. We found:
   1. Maladministration in the landlords response to standard of communication.
   2. Service failure in the landlords response to the residents request for compensation in relation to repair works.
   3. Maladministration in the landlords complaint handing.

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

Summary of reasons

Standard of communication

4. The landlord did not respond promptly to the resident’s enquiries or keep him informed about repairs progress. It did not address the issue in its complaint response.

Compensation

5. The landlord did not follow up on the promise it made in its final complaint response to follow-up compensation with the resident.

Complaint Handling

6. The landlord did not meet the timescales as set out in its complaint handling policy for responding to the resident’s complaint at both stages.

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	Compensation order The landlord must provide evidence of completing what it said it would do in its final complaint response: “After the post-inspection, the disrepair team will liaise with your solicitor for an appropriate compensation award.” It must explain how much compensation it offered, how it was calculated, and when it was paid. If it has subsequently decided not to pay further compensation it must show us evidence that it has clearly explained this to the resident and given meaningful reasons. The resident has told us that he no longer has a solicitor, so the landlord must liaise directly with him to comply with this order.	No later than 08 January 2026
2	Compensation order In light of the failings found in this report, the landlord must pay the resident £600 made up as follows: £250 for the landlord’s response to its standard of communication. £200 for the landlords response to the residents request for compensation in relation to repair works. £150 for the landlords handling of the complaint. 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 08 January 2026

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
26  July 2023	The resident complained to the landlord about persistent damp and mould in the property and an offensive smell coming from the cellar. He said that mould had damaged his personal belongings. The resident asked the landlord to explain what steps it would take to resolve these issues and improve the living conditions in the property.
21 June 2024	The resident came to the Ombudsman. He told us the landlord had not responded to his complaint. We asked the landlord to respond on the resident’s behalf.
3 July 2024	The landlord responded to the complaint. It said: Before works could proceed, it asked its insurers to inspect the property. It confirmed the inspection was complete and that some work had been carried out. Contractors would contact the resident to arrange the remaining identified works. A legal disrepair case was started by the resident on 1 September 2023, and a solicitor was instructed. Compensation would be agreed between the resident’s solicitor and the landlord under the legal disrepair case.
8 July – 20 November 2024	The resident remained dissatisfied and escalated his complaint. He said that work was due to start on the property that day but did not. On 20 November 2024, the landlord called to discuss the escalation. During the call, the resident confirmed that his escalated complaint related to poor communication and that he was seeking compensation. The landlord said it would respond within 5 working days.
25 November 2024	The landlord responded to the escalated complaint. It said: The resident remains dissatisfied due to lack of communication and compensation. The resident confirmed the work is now complete. A post-inspection appointment is booked for 11 December 2024 to identify any outstanding issues. It would liaise with the residents solicitor about compensation after the inspection.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident told the Service that he remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response regarding its standard of communication and compensation. He said that the landlord paid him £920 compensation but delays continued.

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 landlords response its standard of communication.
Finding	Maladministration

7. In July 2023, the resident reported damp and mould, damage to belongings, an unpleasant smell from the cellar, and concerns about the property’s structure. The landlord raised work orders.
8. On 11 June 2024, the resident told the landlord that the works had not started. Surveyors and contractors had visited, but no repairs had begun. The resident asked the landlord for confirmation of the duration and details of missing works. The contractor confirmed work would start on 8 July but did not answer the other queries. On 7 July, the resident advised that without prior contact, access would not be possible the next day. Despite this, operatives attended. This was not in line with the landlord’s repair policy, which requires appointments to be agreed and notice given.
9. The resident later complained about how the landlord handled the repairs. He remained dissatisfied and escalated his complaint, stating that the landlord did not explain the delays and that its communication was poor.
10. In its final complaint response, the landlord did not address the communication issues raised in the escalated complaint. This was inconsistent with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code), which requires landlords to consider all points raised.
11. On 23 October, the landlord told the resident that the final works would finish that day and said it would confirm when complete. However, records show the resident continued to chase for updates and was not informed that the work was complete until several days later.
12. Overall, the landlord’s response was unreasonable because:
    1. It did not address the communication issues raised in the escalated complaint.
    2. It often failed to respond to correspondence or responded late.

Complaint	The landlord’s response to the residents request for compensation in relation to repair works.
Finding	Service failure

13. The resident asked the landlord to pay compensation for how it handled repairs. He brought his complaint to us because he remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response to that request.
14. The landlord’s compensation policy says it will consider a partial rent refund where a resident cannot use a room due to a repair the landlord is responsible for, and where this causes prolonged and unreasonable disruption (it is not apparent from the evidence whether this was the case for the resident). For planned works, such as installing new kitchens, it will assess compensation case by case according to the circumstances. It will award discretionary compensation when its mistakes or failure cause the need to spend unnecessary time and effort in getting it to put things right and will take the duration of any avoidable distress or inconvenience into account.
15. The landlord has confirmed it paid the resident damage compensation of £900 on 24 March 2024. The resident told us that he was also offered £20 for a missed appointment in March 2024, but there is no evidence confirming when this compensation was paid.
16. In its final response in November 2024, the landlord said the works were complete and that a post‑inspection was scheduled for 11 December 2024 to identify any outstanding issues. It said it would liaise with the resident’s solicitor about compensation after the inspection. The resident told us the landlord did not provide any further information about compensation beyond this.
17. Given that the £900 the resident received appears to have been prior to the landlord’s complaint responses, it stands to reason that its complaint responses were referring to further compensation. As there is no evidence of it being calculated or paid, the complaint is left unresolved.

Complaint	Complaint handling.
Finding	Maladministration

18. The landlord has a 2-stage complaint process. It says the resident should receive a formal response to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days from acknowledgement and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days. The process is in line with the Code.
19. The records show that the resident complained to the landlord in July 2023. However, there is no evidence that the landlord responded. The resident then brought his complaint to the Ombudsman, saying he had not received a response. We asked the landlord to respond on the resident’s behalf in June 2024. The landlord replied almost a year after the resident’s original complaint.
20. The resident escalated his complaint on 8 July 2024. The landlord did not make contact until 20 November 2024, when it called the resident to discuss the outstanding points of dissatisfaction. It issued its stage 2 response on 25 November 2024.
21. The landlord did not meet the timescales for responding to the complaint at both stages, as set out in its complaint handling policy and the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code. It did not acknowledge the delays or offer any form of redress. This was a significant failure in its complaint handling.

Learning

Communication

22. The landlord should consider reviewing the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on complaint handling. The report explains that delays, poor communication, and lack of ownership can escalate issues unnecessarily. It recommends clear accountability, timely responses, and proactive engagement to resolve problems early and maintain trust.