London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202429540)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202429540

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

31 July 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of a leak to the resident’s property and the subsequent damp and mould.

Background

The resident is a secure tenant of the property, a 2-bedroom house. She has lived there since March 2022. The landlord has informed us it is aware the resident has vulnerabilities including severe asthma.
On 25 August 2022 the resident reported a water leak to the main bedroom of the property. The landlord inspected the property on 27 October 2022 and identified the guttering needed to be repaired. The landlord completed several repairs during 2022 and 2023.
On 8 April 2024 the resident complained to the landlord the leak had not been resolved, despite multiple visits, and the damp and mould was making her ill.
The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response the following day and apologised for the inconvenience caused. It said a quote for a further inspection of the property had been rejected, which had delayed the resolution. The landlord said the inspection had since been completed and it would consider compensation when the outstanding works had been scheduled.
On 8 July 2024 the resident escalated her complaint. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 13 August 2024. It acknowledged the issue was ongoing and offered the resident £290 compensation.
The resident remained dissatisfied and brought the complaint to us.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

Our Scheme states that we may not investigate complaints which were not brought to the attention of the landlord as a formal complaint within a reasonable period, which would normally be within 12 months of the matters arising.
When deciding the scope of this investigation we have considered that the issue in dispute is the same throughout the whole timeline. Although the resident did not formally complain to the landlord until April 2024, the evidence shows the landlord was made aware of the issue in August 2022 and it engaged with the issue and the resident from then onwards.
As such we have exercised our discretion, and it is appropriate for this investigation to focus on the landlord’s response to reports of damp and mould in the property from August 2022 onwards.
The resident has informed us how the issues have impacted her health. Where we find failure on a landlord’s part, we can consider the resulting distress and inconvenience. However, complaints about personal injury are better dealt with by the courts because they will often have the benefit of an independent medical expert who can give evidence on the diagnosis, prognosis and cause of any injury. This means we are unable to determine if the landlord was responsible for any health impacts or personal injury.

The landlord’s handling of a leak and the subsequent damp and mould

On 25 August 2022 the resident told the landlord damp patches had appeared on the ceiling and walls of her main bedroom following heavy rain. The landlord booked a drone survey appointment for the following day. It has been unable to provide any information regarding this appointment. On an unknown date, a roof tile was repaired and the downpipe cleared.
The landlord’s repairs policy states it is responsible for the maintenance and repair of all roofing and rainwater goods, including gutters and downpipes. The policy further states it will aim to complete day to day repairs within “an average of 25 calendar days”.
The landlord acted quickly to arrange the drone survey. However, due to the lack of survey report confirming the work needed and a lack of dates for completing repairs, we are unable to conclude the landlord acted in line with its policy to complete the repairs.
On 3 October 2022 the resident reported the water leak was ongoing. The landlord arranged for an inspection to be carried out the following day in line with its policy. The inspection report noted:
1. There were signs of pointing work needed on the outside wall near the downpipe.
2. It was possible the issue was originating from a neighbouring property and needed further investigation.
3. Damp readings from the bedroom indicated significant moisture infiltration.
4. A thorough investigation was needed of the resident’s bedroom and appropriate measures to mitigate further moisture penetration.
5. Immediate action was required.
The landlord’s contractor completed a further inspection of the property on 27 October 2022. It is unclear why a second inspection was needed. The second inspection report contained different findings to the first. It said:
1. The condition of the roof and external pointing was satisfactory with no visible issues.
2. The gutter at the rear elevation of the property was blocked, causing excessive moisture on the wall.
3. There was mould in the main bedroom, bathroom and dining room of the property that would need to be addressed.
The landlord’s records show the gutter was cleared the same day. This was in line with the timescales set out in its repairs policy. The records also indicate that a damp and mould treatment was carried out, but the date of this is not clear.
The Housing Health and Safety Rating System (‘the HHSRS’) identifies damp and mould as a hazard in a residential property. It states that damp and mould can be a threat to health, potentially causing breathing difficulties and asthma.
The landlord’s damp and mould policy states it will complete an assessment of damp and mould with 20 working days of receiving a report. It further states following an assessment, it will raise any remedial works within 10 working days. Due to the gaps in the landlord’s record keeping, we are unable to conclude the landlord acted in line with its policy and completed the repairs within 10 working days.
On 9 November 2022 the landlord raised a repair to replace guttering and vents at the resident’s property and obtain a quote for scaffolding. It is unclear from the evidence provided how the repair was identified. The resident contacted the landlord on 25 November 2022 and confirmed water was still leaking into her property. She also stated she believed the roof had not been looked at.
The landlord repaired the guttering on 8 December 2022. This was just outside of the 25-day time scale set out in its policy.
On 21 February 2023 the resident contacted the landlord. She said despite the repairs and mould treatment, the issue was ongoing, and she was concerned for her health.
The failure of the landlord to resolve the issue in December was a repetition of the failure to manage the repair that had occurred earlier in the process.
The resident chased the landlord on 11 April 2023. By this point the landlord failed to complete an assessment of the damp and mould and complete any remedial repairs in line with its policy. The job was marked in the landlord’s records as “complete” over 3 months later. However, there is no record of what work had been carried out.
On 6 November 2023 the landlord raised a further repair for the leak. It is unclear from the evidence provided how the repair was identified. The landlord’s notes dated 30 November 2023 indicate there was some confusion as to what work, if any, its contractor had carried out at that point and whether or not scaffolding would be needed.
The landlord’s contractor carried out a further inspection of the property on 6 April 2024, 5 months after the repair was raised. The landlord has been unable to provide us with a copy of the inspection report.
The resident made her formal complaint on 8 April 2024. She said the issue had been ongoing since 2022 and she wanted the repair completed. The resident said she no longer trusted the process as there was no communication between landlord departments and the delays were impacting her health.
The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response the following day. It apologised for the inconvenience caused and said a quote for scaffolding had been declined in November 2023. This had caused delays. The landlord said the inspection had since taken place and a further quote had been submitted for approval so the necessary repairs could be started. It said it would reassess the case for compensation when the repairs had been scheduled.
Analysis of the response shows it failed to account for the full extent of the delays, dating back to 2022 when the issue was first reported. It also failed to account for why multiple repair visits to the property had failed to resolve the issue. Furthermore, the response did not give the resident a time scale in which she could expect the matter to be resolved.
The resident chased the landlord on 10 May 2024 and was informed the quote had been approved and it was waiting for a date for works to commence from its contractor. The landlord’s contractor attended the property on 16 May 2024, almost 6 months after the landlord became aware the issue had not been resolved.
The resident contacted the landlord on 22 May 2024 and said she believed its contractor had not carried out all of the repairs. This was because she was still experiencing a leak to her bedroom.
The landlord chased its contractor for an update on 31 May 2024. The contractors report, dated 3 June 2024, said:
1. No major leaks were found in the roof or loft. However, minor wear and tear was observed in some areas, but no immediate action was required.
2. The guttering had several leaks which had now been repaired.
3. A mould procedure was carried out within the property.
Upon receipt of this report and having been informed the issue had not been resolved, the landlord took no further action.
The resident escalated her complaint on 8 July 2024. She said the leak into her bedroom had not stopped and she had concerns for her health.
The evidence shows on 2 August 2024 the landlord realised that repointing had been advised previously (October 2022) and not been carried out. The landlord informed the resident it would request its area surveyor to inspect the property and advise on the next steps.
On 13 August 2024 the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. It apologised for the delays in carrying out the repairs and said an inspection would be carried out the following day to identify the source of the leak. The landlord offered the resident £290 compensation.
The landlord completed an inspection of the roof the following day. Its notes recorded there was no sign of any leaks in the roof, and it “seemed to be” a condensation problem. The evidence shows the resident has continued to report the issue to the landlord, but no further action has been taken.
The resident has informed us she has consistently chased the landlord for a solution to this issue since it started in 2022. She said the leak has not stopped and she is still living with damp and mould. The resident states her physical health has declined and the prolonged delays in resolving the issue have caused her great distress and inconvenience.
In summary, the landlord failed to successfully resolve the issue for a significant period of time. Although its attendance at repairs was broadly in line with its policy timescales, the evidence suggests it failed to identify the source of the leak. This has resulted in multiple visits over a prolonged period and the resident still reports the issue has not been resolved.
The landlord was aware the resident had vulnerabilities including severe asthma. It could have reasonably foreseen that any delays in resolving the leak would have increased the likelihood of damp and mould in the property. The landlord would have been aware from the residents’ communications that she was concerned for her health.
The landlord was also aware the 2 inspection reports it had received in October 2022 were contradictory in nature. Having followed the recommendations of the second report, which did not resolve the issue, the landlord failed to consider the recommendations of the first report. It further failed to consider appointing an independent surveyor after 4 of its own inspections failed to locate the source of the leak.
While we recognise tracing the source of a leak can be complex and take time, the evidence shows there was an almost continuous cycle of unproductive appointments, that concentrated on one potential source, the guttering. The evidence shows the landlord had poor communication both internally and with its contractors which increased delays. This was indicative of poor management of the repair issues and poor record keeping. These failures have led to the resident living in a property with a leak and resulting damp and mould resident almost 3 years later. This is unreasonable.
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 to be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes, as well as our own guidance on remedies.
The landlord acknowledged and apologised for the delays within its complaint responses. It offered £290 compensation. Although its offer went some way to put things right, it failed to reflect the full extent of the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident over a prolonged period.
The failures in this case amount to maladministration. To acknowledge the effect on the resident we have ordered additional compensation of £1,300. This is in line with the range recommended in our remedies guidance where there were prolonged failures which had a significant impact on a resident and affected their ability to enjoy their home.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of a leak to the resident’s property and the subsequent damp and mould.

Orders and recommendations

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord must:
1. Provide the resident with a written apology for the failings identified in this report.
2. Pay directly to the resident an additional £1,300 compensation resident to acknowledge the effect of the landlord’s failures. This is to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s poor handling of the damp and mould since 2022.
The landlord must, within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, appoint a suitably qualified independent surveyor to carry out an inspection of the property to identify the cause of the leak and the repairs that need to be completed. We have ordered an independent surveyor because two of the landlord’s surveyors arrived at contradictory conclusions on whether there were external issues or whether the issue was condensation. By independent we mean someone with relevant qualifications to carry out the inspection and who has not been involved in inspecting the property previously. The inspection must be completed within 4 weeks of the date of this determination.
The survey inspection must:
1. Include an inspection of the external building and the resident’s home.
2. Set out a cause of the issues.
3. Set out whether the property is fit for human habitation or whether suitable temporary accommodation is required.
The survey report must:
1. Include photographs of the area’s affected as well as causes.
2. Set out a full scope of works as well as likely timescales for the works.
3. Whether the resident can remain in the property during the works.
The landlord must take all steps to ensure the survey report is received within 10 working days of the inspection. It must then provide a copy to us and the resident.
The landlord must, following receipt of the inspection report (survey), ensure that works are commenced not later than 41 days (6 weeks) from the date it received the report.
The landlord must, within 9 weeks of the date it received the inspection report, provide evidence that it has commenced the works or provide reasons and evidence as to why it has not / cannot start the work within these timescales, together with amended start times.
The landlord must provide us with documentary evidence of compliance with the orders within the timescales set out above.