Social Tenant Access to Information Requirements (STAIRs) consultation is now open. 

Take part in the consultation

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202424059)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202424059

London & Quadrant Housing Trust

2 October 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. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
    1. Leaks and associated damp and mould.
    2. The resident’s complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the property, a bungalow owned by the landlord. She has asthma and mobility issues.
  2. The resident reported a roof leak into her bathroom on 4 October 2021. The landlord attended on 14 October 2021 but could not find the source of the leak. She reported mould on walls and inside her fitted wardrobe on 26 October 2021. It investigated the leak and completed a mould treatment.
  3. The resident complained to the landlord on 2 December 2021 about its handling of the leak and its response to damp and mould. She asked it to resolve the issues.
  4. The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response on 15 December 2021. It said once it authorised a quote it would confirm an appointment for roof works, kitchen, and bathroom fan works. It apologised for its service and offered £300 compensation for inconvenience, distress, time, and effort.
  5. The resident continued to report issues to the landlord in 2022 and 2023. It increased its stage 1 compensation offer to £1,530 in this time. On 19 July 2024, it escalated her complaint as she was unhappy with its offer, and it wanted to assess the fairness of its compensation.
  6. The landlord sent its final complaint response on 5 September 2024. It listed the agreed repairs, including installing internal vents, changing pipework to the extractor fans and refixing guttering downpipes. It said it completed all works except the extractor fans for which it would make a new appointment. It apologised for the discomfort faced by the resident. It increased its compensation to £1,670.
  7. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response to repairs and ongoing problems with mould. She asked us to investigate. She would like the landlord to listen to her and help her with the issues in her property.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident said this situation had a detrimental impact on her health and wellbeing. The courts are the most effective place for disputes about personal injury and illness. We cannot decide causation or liability for personal injury like a court can. However, we can consider the overall impact of the situation on the resident. We have considered the landlord’s compensation offers within our general assessment of her complaints. If the resident wants to pursue a personal injury claim, she may wish to seek independent legal advice.
  2. The resident submitted an insurance claim for mould damage to her property. This is ongoing after an earlier settlement offer of £500. We are unable to comment on the outcome of the insurance claim as we have no jurisdiction over the landlord’s insurers.

Leaks, damp, and mould

  1. After the resident reported a leak into her bathroom on 4 October 2021, the landlord raised works with a response date of 2 November 2021. It began to investigate the source of the leak from 14 October 2021. It found issues with the boiler flue sending steam back into the property on 15 November 2021. It completed works to this on 8 December 2021. Its repairs policy at the time gave no set timeframe for routine repairs.
  2. Leaks can be complex and difficult to trace. While it took several appointments for the landlord to find the source of the leak, it repaired it within 2 months. This was not an excessive delay, and the evidence shows it was working to find the required repair.
  3. The resident reported mould in her fitted wardrobe and on the living room walls on 26 October 2021. The landlord completed an assessment and mould treatment on 4 November 2021. It attended within 7 working days which prompt.
  4. The landlord completed further inspections of the property throughout November 2021. On 25 November 2021, it found it needed to repair a downpipe joint and clear the guttering but could not access the rear of the property to check for further issues. It did not raise works for this or a further inspection. This was unreasonable as it identified a repair.
  5. The resident included the landlord’s handling of the leaks and damp and mould in her complaint of 2 December 2021. It said internally that the property repair history was difficult to make sense of. The number of investigative appointments listed in its repairs log reflects this. It is important for landlords to keep clear and accurate repair records. This enables it to effectively manage any issues raised by its residents as well as fulfilling its obligations.
  6. On 8 and 9 December 2021, the landlord completed more works to another leak from the roof. It raised works for a new downpipe. This was a positive response.
  7. In its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord said it was waiting for a works quotation. Once it had this, it would make appointments for roofing and extractor fan works. It offered £300 compensation for inconvenience, distress, time, and effort in relation to service failures for repairs. This was a fair offer in line with our remedies guidance for a failure which adversely affected the resident.
  8. The resident chased the landlord about installing internal vents for damp and mould prevention in early January 2022. It booked an appointment for 16 February 2022. It completed works to install a new downpipe on 20 January 2022. During this appointment, it found an open-ended pipe in the loft was causing water to drip into the property and recommended further investigation.
  9. The resident contacted the landlord on 20 October 2022 to say she had not had an appointment for the vents. She said it started works to the extractor fans but did not finish them. It said it was in the process of finding a new contractor and the next appointment would be to fit the vents.
  10. The landlord did not complete works to the vents as promised in 2022. There is no evidence to show it took any action between January and October 2023. However, from October 2023 it is clear the resident reported damp and mould causing damage to her belongings. The gaps in evidence mean we are unable to fully assess the landlord’s response during this time. However, it did not work within its routine repairs policy of completing works during the earliest mutually convenient appointment for the vent installation. This was not appropriate.
  11. On 12 December 2023, the resident reported the bathroom extractor fan was leaking water into the property. The landlord inspected this within 24 hours but did not raise any follow up works. It is not clear what it found during this inspection.
  12. The landlord completed a damp and mould report on 2 January 2024. It found no mould but identified thinner than recommended loft insulation and inadequate gaps for air circulation in the bathroom and bedroom doors. It found a broken kitchen extractor fan and an intermittent fault with the bathroom fan. It did not act on this report. At this stage, the resident had been reporting problems for over 2 years.
  13. The landlord marked works to the bathroom extractor fan as complete on 30 January 2024. However, in a damp and mould inspection on 29 February 2024 it found there was still a leak from the fan. It said this was down to it installing the wrong type of pipe for extraction. It found no mould but both extractor fans still needed repairs. There is no evidence it raised works after this, but it noted the resident cancelled repairs to the kitchen and bathroom fans on 4 April 2024.
  14. The landlord escalated the resident’s complaint on 19 July 2024. She was not satisfied with its compensation offer. It said internally it had communicated with her for “a number of years.” It said it revised its compensation offer approximately 3 times and its final stage 1 offer was £1,530.
  15. The resident called the landlord on 13 August 2024 as it did not complete loft works to the extractor pipework as planned. She said it sent the wrong operatives. It did not follow up on this. This was almost 6 months since it found it needed to replace the pipes and was not a reasonable response.
  16. In its stage 2 response of 5 September 2024, the landlord said it offered the resident a decant which she declined. We have not seen evidence of this. It said it completed all agreed works including installing cupboard door vents, but the extractor pipework repairs remained outstanding. It said it would make a new appointment for this. It apologised for poor service standards and offered £1,670 compensation. £1,630 of this related to repairs, comprising:
    1. £1,530 offered at stage 1.
    2. £100 for inconvenience following a rescheduled appointment.
  17. The landlord’s complaint response was fair. Its compensation offer was appropriate and in line with our remedies guidance for serious failings which had a severe long-term impact on a resident.
  18. The landlord completed works to the extractor fan pipework on 29 October 2024, a further 38 working days after sending its stage 2 complaint response. This was not fair to the resident who had already been waiting for 8 months. However, its earlier compensation offer was fair and appropriate despite this additional delay.
  19. Overall, the landlord’s handling of repairs was poor. Its records of completion dates were unclear and left the resident waiting months for repairs. However, its offers of redress at stage 2 were fair and appropriate. As such, we find the landlord offered the resident reasonable redress. On 29 September she told us she is still experiencing mould in the property and other works are outstanding. We recommend the landlord completes an up-to-date survey of the property to identify any required works relating to damp and mould.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord has a 2-stage complaints policy. It had a 10-working day response time for stage 1 and 20 working days for stage 2 complaints throughout the period of this complaint. Its policy in September 2022 said residents must escalate complaints to stage 2 within 6 months of its stage 1 decision. This changed to 12 months in its March 2024 policy.
  2. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s stage 1 complaint in December 2021 was fair and in line with its policy timescales. However, it decided to escalate her complaint to stage 2 in July 2024, over 2 years later. It made this decision after revising its earlier compensation offers after its stage 1 response.
  3. The landlord escalated the complaint on 19 July 2024 but did not respond until 5 September 2024. This was 33 working days later and exceeded its policy timescale. It gave a general apology for its service standards and offered £40 compensation for its delayed complaint response. It did not acknowledge or explain its decision to escalate a complaint so far outside of its policy timescales.
  4. The £40 compensation offer was low in the circumstances. We acknowledge the delay in responding at stage 2 was not excessive. However, by continuing to revise its earlier compensation offers, the landlord complicated the complaints process.
  5. Some issues discussed in the landlord’s stage 2 response did not feature in its stage 1 from December 2021, although they were similar. Section 6.8 of our Complaint Handling Code says where a resident has raised issues unrelated to those under a stage 1 investigation, the landlord must log the new issues as a new complaint. Given the time passed in this case, it would have been good practice for the landlord to raise a new complaint at stage 1.
  6. Overall, we find maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint. We will make an order for £200 compensation, inclusive of the £40 offered in its stage 2 response. We will also order the landlord to contact the resident and see if she needs to raise a new complaint for any ongoing issues.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord offered redress to the complainant. In our opinion it satisfactorily resolves the complaint about the landlord’s handling of leaks, damp and mould.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 28 days of this report, the landlord must:
    1. Pay the resident £200 compensation, comprising:
      1. £40 offered at stage 2 for its delayed complaint response if it has not already paid this.
      2. £160 additional payment for the identified complaint handling failures.
    2. Contact the resident to determine whether it should begin a new complaints process for any ongoing or outstanding repairs.
    3. Write an apology to the resident from a senior manager for the failures identified in this report.
    4. Provide us with proof of compliance with the above orders.

Recommendations

  1. We recommend the landlord pay the resident the remaining £1,630 compensation. We find reasonable redress on the basis the landlord pays this amount. It should pay this sum to her direct and not offset against arrears where they exist.
  2. We recommend the landlord completes a full and thorough damp and mould survey of the resident’s property to determine any required works.