London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202440409)

Background

1. The resident complained about the landlord’s failure to provide a reasonable adjustment to allow her to access her post at home. The landlord is aware of the resident’s vulnerabilities.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
   1. Request for a reasonable adjustment to enable access to her post.
   2. Complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found:
   1. Maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for a reasonable adjustment to enable access to her post.
   2. Service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

Request for a reasonable adjustment

4. The landlord unreasonably delayed its provision of a reasonable adjustment to allow the resident to access her post. This meant its compensation offer was not proportionate to the delays she experienced.

Complaint handling

5. Although the landlord apologised and offered redress for some delays in its complaint handling, it failed to acknowledge the extent of its failings.

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.

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

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.

6. The landlord’s records show that the resident complained after it told her it would remove a table placed in the communal hallway. She said the landlord was aware from earlier discussions that she used the table for her post. This was because her disability prevented her from bending to pick it up from the floor. She also said the landlord had agreed to make a reasonable adjustment so that her post was accessible without the table but had not yet done so.
7. The landlord subsequently removed the table a month later on 15 April 2024. There is no evidence that it contacted the resident to discuss any alternative measures it would put in place to allow her to access her post. Given she had communicated that this was the reason the table had been present in the communal area, and it was aware of her vulnerabilities, it would have been reasonable for it to do so.
8. The evidence shows that the landlord’s communication with the resident regarding the matter was poor. It failed to keep her updated on its actions which led to her needing to chase it for information. Its failure to communicate effectively likely left the resident feeling frustrated and ignored.
9. The landlord’s stage 1 response apologised for the inconvenience the situation caused to the resident. It was reasonable that it explained that it had a ‘zero tolerance policy’ for items left in the communal area. It recognised its duty to provide a reasonable adjustment. It said on 13 May 2024 it would attend to fit an external letterbox so that the resident could access her post without the need to bend. It offered £80 in compensation for the distress and inconvenience.
10. The landlord’s compensation offer was in line with the range of awards set out in our remedies guidance for when there has been a failing which adversely affected a resident. It acted in line with its discretionary compensation policy.Its offer to carry out a reasonable adjustment along with timescales was in line with its policy to adapt its service provision based on resident’s individual circumstances.
11. That said, delays in installing the letter box ensued. The landlord’s contractor attended on 13 May 2024 but did not know what work to complete, so no adjustment was made. The resident chased the landlord on 17 May 2024 and clarified that she needed a letter catcher fitted to her front door. There is no evidence that it replied to this or rearranged the appointment.
12. In its final response the landlord apologised for the inconvenience and its delay to arrange the reasonable adjustment. It offered a further £100 compensation which brought its total compensation offer to £180. It subsequently fitted the letter catcher on 17 October 2025, a further 11 months after its final response. Due to this we have determined its offer of compensation was not proportionate to the delays and detriment the resident experienced with the matter continuing for over 19 months. With consideration of our remedies guidance, we have made orders for it to apologise and pay increased compensation.

13. The landlord operates a 2-stage complaints process. It acknowledges complaints within 5 working days. It responds to stage 1 and 2 complaints within 10 and 20 working days respectively. This is compliant with the Complaint Handling Code (the Code).
14. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint at stage 1 within its policy timescales. On 27 March 2024, in line with its policy, it told her its stage 1 response would be delayed. It said it would issue this by 12 April 2024. The resident subsequently chased the landlord on 15 and 19 April 2024. There is no evidence it responded to this contact.
15. The landlord sent its stage 1 response 27 working days later than the timescales set out in its policy. It appropriately apologised for this delay in its response and offered £80 compensation. This was in line with the range of awards set out in our remedies guidance for when there has been a delay causing inconvenience to a resident.
16. The landlord failed to escalate the resident’s complaint on 14 May 2024. It only did so following further contact from her relating to a separate matter, over 5 months later, in October 2024. It failed to acknowledge this, apologise or offer any redress to the resident in its final response.
17. The landlord sent its final response 1 working day outside of its published timescales. It apologised for not adhering to its policy timescales and offered £90 compensation. This was within the range of awards set out in our remedies guidance as set out above.
18. In summary, although the landlord acknowledged and offered redress for some failings in its complaint handling, it did not identify all failings. It also failed to demonstrate any learning. We have ordered it to pay compensation to recognise the time, trouble, distress, and inconvenience it caused.

Learning

19. The landlord failed to monitor the case following its final complaint response to ensure that it completed the actions it had agreed to. It should consider reviewing its record keeping arrangements for complaints and any follow on actions required, to ensure that these are robust. This is to ensure that accurate and accessible records are kept and collated, both of actions completed and of resident contact. It may wish to refer to the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on knowledge and information management.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

20. The landlord’s records did not capture its decision-making process relating to consideration of the required reasonable adjustment. This was not in line with the approach set out in its supporting residents with additional needs policy. It should ensure that it adheres to the record keeping practices set out in its relevant policies and procedures.

Communication

21. The landlord failed to communicate delays throughout the complaint process with the resident. It is important that it effectively manages residents’ expectations about how it intends to respond to concerns and that it keeps them informed of any delays and how it intends to mitigate the impact of these.