London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202416258)

Background

1. In June 2023 the resident reported damp and mould in her home. She was concerned about her pregnant daughter staying in the affected bedroom. The landlord inspected and identified that it needed to repair brickwork and guttering which caused the damp. The complaint is about how long it took to complete the repairs.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about how the landlord handled:
   1. Damp and mould related repairs.
   2. The complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We found:
   1. Service failure with the landlord’s handling of damp and mould repairs.
   2. Service failure with the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

4. We found:
   1. The landlord took over a year to complete the repairs. Upon complaint, it apologised, offered compensation, and made sure it completed the work. However, it did not demonstrate any learning, and its offer of compensation did not reflect the detriment to the resident.
   2. The landlord delayed sending its stage 1 response and failed to escalate the resident’s complaint to stage 2. Although it apologised, it did not identify the failings with its complaint handling.

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.

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.

5. The landlord’s repairs policy says it is responsible for the structure and exterior of the property. It sets a target of 25 working days for routine repairs. Its damp and mould policy says it will assess the problem within 20 working days. It aims to identify the cause and raise remedial works within 10 working days of the assessment. The policy recognises that the issue may need more than 1 repair but says it will be clear on timeframes and keep the resident informed.
6. The records did not confirm when the resident first reported damp and mould in her bedroom. On 21 June 2023 the landlord raised repairs for a mould clean in 2 bedrooms. It had identified the need to repair blocked guttering on 12 June 2023 and noted it would require scaffold. It inspected the property on 29 June 2023, identifying the need for repairs to guttering and brickwork. It said this was causing damp on a bedroom wall. It raised the remedial work on 5 July 2023. Up to this point, the landlord met its policy timescales.
7. On 24 August 2023 the landlord recorded that it could not raise follow-on work because it was waiting on a staff member to complete a scaffold form. This was 54 working days after it had first recorded the need for scaffold on its system. Although the policy does not set completion times for damp and mould works, this delay was unreasonable. Furthermore, it failed to communicate with the resident that there were delays with the work which was a failure under its policy. This caused the resident time and trouble having to chase for updates.
8. By 14 December 2023 the landlord was aware the contractors had erected scaffold. On 22 January 2024 it contacted the resident and told her it had made an appointment for 7 March 2024 to repoint the brickwork. It did not give the resident any explanation for the delay. This appointment fell 178 working days after the landlord had identified the repairs needed which was unreasonable.
9. The resident made her stage 1 complaint on 24 January 2024. She referred to appointments that do not appear in the landlord’s records. The landlord should ensure its staff and contractors keep accurate records of when visits took place, and what actions it took, so it has a reliable audit trail.
10. In its stage 1 response the landlord said it had completed some repairs on 20 December 2023 and scheduled further work. It did not explain the earlier delays but said it would monitor the repairs until completion. It offered £420 compensation. It did not acknowledge the resident’s concerns that her daughter had to sleep elsewhere. The Housing Ombudsman Complaint Handling Code (the Code) requires landlords to respond to all points of a resident’s complaint.
11. The landlord rearranged the appointment on 7 March 2024 to 17 April 2024 because of staff sickness. While staff absence can be unavoidable, there is no evidence the landlord considered appointing another contractor or looked at any other interim support it could offer. Given the resident had already waited around 9 months, these would have been reasonable steps.
12. The resident told the landlord several times that her pregnant daughter could not sleep in the bedroom because of the mould and wall condition. The landlord’s records do not show any acknowledgement of this until its stage 2 response. There is no evidence it carried out a risk assessment to determine whether the room was habitable given the vulnerabilities. It has also not shown that it offered any further advice or support when the resident explained the impact on the family. This would have been reasonable in the circumstances and consistent with its approach to vulnerable residents under its repairs and damp and mould policies.
13. The landlord’s compensation policy allows a partial rent refund when a customer is unable to use a room due to a repair issue. It may have been reasonable for the landlord to consider this at the time or explain why it had not. We have not made an order for compensation based on room loss as the evidence does not clearly state that the landlord deemed it uninhabitable. However, we have considered the distress and inconvenience that this had on the resident.
14. After issuing its stage 1 response, the landlord did not monitor the repairs. It did not fully complete them until 26 November 2024 – 369 working days after it had first recorded the issue. This was an unreasonable amount of time and the landlord failed to do what it said it would in its stage 1 response.
15. In its stage 2 response, the landlord increased its compensation offer to a total of £1,080. It is unclear whether the amount awarded for time and effort was in relation to repairs or the complaint handling, as the landlord referred to both. We have reasonably treated this as being for time and trouble relating to the repair, due to the length of time the landlord took to rectify the issue.
16. At stage 2, the landlord monitored the repairs to completion and communicated well with the resident, which was positive. In isolation, these actions may have been sufficient for a finding of reasonable redress. However, the landlord’s overall handling fell short. There were prolonged and unexplained delays, and it did not identify learning. It did not recognise the full impact due to the household’s vulnerabilities or consider other appropriate compensation at the time. In the circumstances, its actions did not fully put things right. We therefore find service failure. We order the landlord to apologise and pay an additional £280 compensation for distress and inconvenience, and £240 for time and trouble. This reflects the significant impact on the resident.

17. The response timescales in the landlord’s complaint policy align with the Code.
18. The resident made her stage 1 complaint on 24 January 2024. The landlord acknowledged it on 25 January 2024 and sent its response on 15 February 2024. This was 15 working days after it had recorded the complaint and therefore was not in line with its policy or the Code.
19. After receiving the stage 1 response, the resident contacted the landlord in March and April 2024. She raised concerns about the outcome, the compensation offered, the landlord’s communication, and the outstanding repairs. She asked to discuss her complaint and next steps. She was clearly dissatisfied and the ongoing situation was impacting her. The Code defines a complaint as an expression of dissatisfaction, however made. The landlord did not escalate her complaint at this point which was a service failure.
20. After contacting us in July 2024, the resident went back to the landlord on 15 October 2024 to escalate her complaint to stage 2. The landlord acknowledged the same day. It sent its response on 8 November 2024, 19 working days later. This was in line with its policy and the Code.
21. At stage 2, the landlord increased its total compensation offer to £1,080. Its response was apologetic, empathetic, and detailed. The complaint handler played a key role in ensuring the repairs were completed. However, the landlord did not acknowledge its earlier complaint handling failures or demonstrate learning. Our finding of service failure recognises the landlord’s attempts to put things right. But it also reflects on the avoidable time and trouble the resident experienced pursuing her complaint. We order the landlord to pay £50 compensation. This is in line with our compensation guidance for a low impact failure with no permanent detriment to the resident.

Learning

22. The Code explains that good complaint handling provides landlords with essential insight into day-to-day operations. It helps them assess effectiveness, identify organisational issues, and use complaint data to inform decisions and improve services. Landlords should investigate complaints thoroughly and learn from customer feedback.
23. In this case, the landlord did not give the resident timeframes for the damp and mould repairs and did not show it considered the resident’s vulnerabilities. The Hazards in Social Housing (Prescribed Requirements) (England) 2025, known as ‘Awaab’s law’, became statutory for the social rented sector on 27 October 2025. From that date, landlords must investigate and address damp, mould, and emergency hazards within fixed timescales. Inspections must determine if the home is safe and fit to live in. Whilst not applicable for this case, it is important that the landlord manages situations like this appropriately.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

24. In this case, the landlord did not always keep clear records of the actions it took. It may benefit from reviewing our spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management (May 2023), available through our website’s Centre for Learning.

Communication

25. The landlord did not always communicate clearly or promptly with the resident. Landlords should give timely updates and explain delays to reduce avoidable inconvenience and support effective service delivery.