From 13 January 2026, we no longer accept new case enquiries by email. Please use our online complaint form to bring a complaint to us. This helps us respond to you more quickly.

Need help? Other ways to contact us.

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202444757)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202444757

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

17 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports about the condition of her window and front door.

Background

  1. The resident has an assured tenancy with the landlord for a 3-storey ground-floor flat. The resident lives with her partner and 3 children. The resident moved into the property in January 2024.
  2. On 31 January 2024, the landlord completed a repair to the lock on the front door. It assessed the front door and windows at the property on 2 April. The inspection recommended they be replaced but the landlord raised them for renewal the same day on its “component renewal programme.” The landlord would go on to use “renew” and “replace” interchangeably from this point onwards.
  3. The resident complained on 23 July 2024. She said the landlord told her the windows and front door would be replaced, but she had no further communication about this. She raised concerns that the windowsills were rotting on her daughter’s health conditions. She also said the front door was not secure.
  4. The landlord provided its stage 1 response on 25 July 2024. It confirmed it had raised the renewal of the windows and front door. It could not give a specific date for this, but it would contact her closer to the time.
  5. The resident escalated her complaint on 10 September 2024. She believed she should have priority for renewal of the windows and doors due to the potential impact on her daughter’s health. She was also concerned about the safety of the front door, and the impact of winter and her energy costs and noise pollution from a nearby train station due to the windows’ poor condition.
  6. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 16 October 2024. It confirmed that the renewal of the front door and windows was scheduled for 2025/2026 but would try to bring forward the work based on the health concerns the resident had reported. It agreed to revisit to carry out any temporary repairs to the windows and door in advance of the renewal works. It also apologised and offered £40 compensation for its delayed stage 2 response.
  7. After inspecting the property on 7 January 2025, the landlord found the windows and front door were beyond repair and the only option was replacement. The landlord replaced the front door on 10 April 2025. The resident told the Ombudsman she did not think she should have to wait for the landlord to replace the windows due to the impact on her family’s health.

Assessment and findings

  1. In her complaint, the resident asked for clarification about when the landlord would replace the windows and front door. She said it had informed her about the need to replace them when it inspected her property a few months prior.
  2. In its complaint response, the landlord appropriately managed her expectations. It explained it had raised the renewal of her windows and doors, and this would be completed in its 2025/2026 programme. It also explained that the workload for the renewal programme was extensive, meaning it could not complete the work at her property immediately.
  3. The landlord also told the resident that it would contact her closer to the time of the installation of the front door and windows. This was in accordance with information in its ‘Planned Maintenance Works’ information pack for all residents expecting major works. This states that a contractor will visit when work is due to start, and they will provide further details, including a start date.
  4. The landlord’s repairs policy states it can “adjust (its) service standards” for where a delay would put a vulnerable person at risk because of their condition. The resident raised several reasons why she felt the windows were affecting her family’s health. She said the property was extremely cold and her daughter needed a warm home during winter to avoid her respiratory condition putting her in the hospital. She also informed it of her anxiety and sleep deprivation.
  5. Prior to issuing its stage 2 response, on 9 October 2024, the landlord confirmed internally that it could consider urgent replacement of the windows and front door. This would be through its minor works team only if urgent replacement was required or there was a health and safety risk. This advice was in line with its repairs policy.
  6. In its complaint response, the landlord confirmed it would take appropriate steps to address the impact on the family’s vulnerabilities. It said internally that this was the impact the cold weather had on the family. Its stage 2 reply on 16 October 2024 said it would attend at her property to assess the windows and front door. It said this was to determine whether it could complete temporary repairs prior to any replacement taking place. This approach was in line with the advice it received on 9 October, as it was attempting to see if it could make the property safe.
  7. However, the landlord did not attend to assess temporary repairs until 7 January 2025, over 3 months after it said it would. There was no reason given by the landlord for the time take and it did not update the resident during this period. Given the circumstances, with it being winter and the resident’s daughter’s health concerns, this was not reasonable.
  8. This was particularly relevant as on 21 November 2024, the resident told the landlord she and her family had to stay with a relative due to the cold temperature of the property. The landlord was aware of the impact cold weather could have on the resident’s daughter at this point. There is no evidence of it considering if there were other measures it could take at that time or support it could offer the resident.
  9. During the inspection on 7 January 2025, the landlord found that it could not complete temporary repairs to the front door or windows. The resident raised further concerns about the safety of the front door on 3 February. She stated the door had opened when locked. She said it was not due to the lock but the condition of the door.
  10. The landlord replaced the lock on the front door on 27 March 2025, before replacing the door on 10 April. This was an appropriate step to address the further health and safety issues raised by the resident. It was also in line with the advice it received on 9 October 2024 regarding completing an earlier repair if there was a health and safety issue. However, it took over 4 months to complete this from determining it could not repair the door and 2 months from the resident reporting a serious safety issue with the door. This left the resident and her family in a potentially unsafe situation for an unreasonable amount of time.
  11. It was appropriate and natural for the landlord to investigate interim repairs for the windows before deciding to replace them. However, having inspected and finding repairs were not possible, the landlord should have at least considered the other option it had available— replacing them. There is no evidence to suggest it did so. This was counter to its repairs policy and was not fully considerate of the impact on the family’s health.
  12. In summary, the landlord initially managed the residents’ expectations about the scale of the replacement of the front door and windows. It obtained advice that it could bring the repairs forward if there was evidence of health and safety issues. It did not follow this up initially, but that was reasonable while it considered temporary repairs. The landlord then took an unreasonable amount of time to assess the feasibility of repairs, did not consider the possibility of other options (such as replacing the windows ahead of schedule), or offer support during the time the resident told it she was staying with family due to the cold in the property. Taken together, these amount to serious failings in the landlord’s handling of the issues reported by the resident.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports about the condition of her window and front door.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of this report, the landlord must pay the resident compensation of £500 in light of the failures identified in this report.
  2. Within 6 weeks, the landlord must confirm when the windows are to be replaced. If this is not to be before November 2025 it must discuss with and then share with the resident a plan of action to mitigate the impact of the windows’ poor condition on her and her family.
  3. Within 8 weeks the landlord must consider the findings in this report and confirm either that its current processes and procedures are sufficient to avoid similar failings in future, or identify what learning it can take from the complaint to improve future service.
  4. Evidence of compliance with these orders must be provided by their deadlines.