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

Take part in the consultation

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202449593)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202449593

London & Quadrant Housing Trust

30 September 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:
    1. Reports of damp and mould in the property.
    2. Complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The property is a 2-bedroom flat in a block of flats. The resident lives with her 2 children. The resident informed us and the landlord that her children are coughing and having breathing difficulties which she links to the mould and damp in the property.
  2. The resident contacted the landlord on 16 June 2024. She said her whole bathroom was covered in mould, the bath panel was falling apart, the radiator pipes were leaking, and the ceiling was cracking and mouldy. The landlord raised repair jobs for the bath panel and radiator works. The landlord’s damp and mould specialist contractors attended the property on 25 June 2024. They identified mould in the bathroom and living room. They treated the affected areas and offered specific advice on how to avoid reoccurrence.
  3. The resident made a formal complaint on 26 November 2024. She stated there was further reoccurrence of mould in her bathroom and living room. She asked the landlord to hold off any decorative follow-on works until after it had established and resolved the root cause of the damp and mould.
  4. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 9 December 2024. It acknowledged the resident’s concerns about recurring mould, apologised, and committed to surveying the property before completing decorative work. It awarded £50 compensation. This comprised £25 for the impact on vulnerabilities and £25 for time and effort spent pursuing the complaint.
  5. The resident did not accept the £50 compensation and escalated the complaint on 15 December 2024. She said the landlord had not resolved the mould issue, relied on temporary treatments, and offered compensation without completing repairs. She asked the landlord to conduct effective works to resolve the problem.
  6. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 25 March 2025. It confirmed the works previously completed to address the issues, apologised, and accepted failings in communication and complaint handling. It committed to arranging an independent damp and mould survey and said it would keep the resident informed. It awarded £290 total compensation, comprising £125 for damp and mould issues and £165 for complaint handling.
  7. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response. She said the landlord failed to resolve the damp and mould, which continued to affect her family’s health and damage her belongings. She brought her complaint to us seeking a lasting solution to the damp and mould issues and increased compensation.

Events after ICP

  1. The landlord’s independent damp and mould survey took place on 1 April 2025. The surveyor identified mould on the bathroom ceiling and a defective bath panel. They recommended replacing the ceiling and installing a passive wall vent. In the bedroom, no mould was visible, but the resident reported recurring mould behind furniture placed against a cold wall. She also informed the surveyor of her daughter’s persistent coughing and tonsil swelling, possibly linked to the mould. The surveyor marked all recommended works as essential.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. In communication with us, the resident said this situation had had a detrimental impact on her and his children’s health. The courts are the most effective place for disputes about personal injury and illness. This is largely because independent medical experts are appointed to give evidence. They have a duty to the court to provide unbiased insights on the diagnosis, prognosis, and cause of any illness or injury. When disputes arise over the cause of an injury, oral testimony can be examined in court. While we cannot consider the effect on health, consideration has been given to any general distress and inconvenience which the resident experienced because of any service failure by the landlord.
  2. The resident reported that she has experienced issues with damp and mould in the property for the past 9 years. We encourage residents to raise complaints with their landlord in a timely manner. This is so the landlord has a reasonable opportunity to investigate the issue whilst it is still ‘live’ and sufficient evidence is available to reach an informed conclusion. As issues become historical it is increasingly difficult for either the landlord, or an independent body such as an Ombudsman, to conduct an effective review of the actions taken. This investigation relates to the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property on 16 June 2024 which was the subject of the complaint that exhausted the landlord’s complaints procedure on 25 March 2025.

Reports of damp and mould in the property.

  1. The landlord’s damp and mould policy states it will arrange an assessment within 20 working days of a report and raise remedial works within 10 working days of inspection. Its repairs policy states it will complete routine repairs within 20 working days and more complex repairs within 40 working days.
  2. The landlord responded appropriately to the resident’s reports in June 2024. It conducted an inspection within the relevant policy timeframe, completed damp and mould treatments, and provided advice on prevention. It raised and completed works to the extractor fan, bath panel, and radiator within policy timescales. Its initial actions were prompt and reasonable.
  3. The landlord’s records show no further reports of damp and mould from the resident between the inspection and treatment completed on 25 June 2024 and her stage 1 complaint on 26 November 2024. This 5-month gap suggests the initial remedial actions were effective in the short term.
  4. The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response on 9 December 2024 was reasonable. It acknowledged the distress and inconvenience caused, accepted that it had not permanently resolved the issue, and appropriately apologised. It said its healthy homes team would survey the property to investigate the root cause of the issue. It committed to completing any necessary works.
  5. In her escalation request on 15 December 2024 the resident said the landlord had not contacted her to book the healthy home surveyor’s visit, despite stating in its stage 1 complaint response that it would contact her on the morning of 9 December 2024. She followed up again on 25 January and 27 February 2025, reporting that the mould was spreading, affecting her daughter’s health, and damaging personal items including a new bed and wardrobe.
  6. The landlord’s actions after its stage 1 complaint response were not reasonable. It failed to act on its stage 1 commitment to arrange a healthy home survey and did not respond to the resident’s follow-up reports in a timely manner. Given that she expressed concerns around the damp and mould affecting her daughter’s health, it should have considered this and been more pro-active in arranging the inspection and completing any required repairs.
  7. According to its damp and mould policy, the landlord should have arranged an assessment within 20 working days of the stage 1 response. However, by the time it issued its stage 2 response on 25 March 2025, it had not still completed the inspection. This was a delay of over 70 working days, significantly outside its stated timeframes. This failure to follow through on its commitments and policy obligations allowed the issue to escalate, caused further distress, and undermined the effectiveness of its initial stage 1 response.
  8. Where there are failings by a landlord, as is the case here, we will consider whether the redress offered by it (including an apology and compensation) put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this, we consider whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with our dispute resolution principles to be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
  9. The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response on 25 March 2025 acknowledged its failings in communication, delays in arranging the inspection and accepted that it had not permanently resolved the issue. It apologised and committed to arranging an independent damp and mould survey. It awarded £125 compensation specifically for the damp and mould issues. This was broken down as £50 for inconvenience, £50 for distress and impact, and £25 for vulnerabilities previously offered at stage 1. It appropriately provided its insurer’s details to the resident to make a claim for her damaged personal items and health impacts.
  10. However, its records show that by the time of its stage 2 response, it had still not completed the healthy home inspection it committed to at stage 1 of its complaints process. As earlier stated, this was significantly outside its policy timeframes and contradicted its earlier assurances. Given the delay in arranging the first promised inspection and the lack of follow-up on further reports, it was unrealisable of the landlord not to have followed up on its assurance to complete any works identified in the independent survey it raised in its stage 2 response.
  11. The independent surveyor attended on 1 April 2025. The surveyor identified mould in the bathroom and recommended essential remedial works. However, the resident has informed us that the landlord has not completed the works. The landlord also confirmed this in its correspondence to us on 24 September 2025. This failure to act on the surveyor’s recommendations further delayed resolution and prolonged the impact on the resident.
  12. Overall, the landlord failed to use its complaints process to resolve the issue or put things right. Our complaint Handling Code (the Code) makes clear that the purpose of complaint handling is to put things right where failures have occurred. The landlord did not do this.
  13. In conclusion we have found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s report of damp and mould in the property. As a result, we have ordered the landlord to take specific actions to resolve the issue and to pay the resident an additional £400 in compensation.
  14. This amount reflects the likely distress and inconvenience the resident experienced and is consistent with the landlord’s compensation policy, which states that awards should consider the extent, severity, and impact of the failure. It also aligns with our remedies guidance for cases where there was a failure which adversely affected the resident and the landlord has made some attempt to put things right.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy states it should respond to stage 1 complaint within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days. This aligns with the position in the Code.
  2. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 9 December 2024 within 10 working days of the complaint. This was in line with both its policy and the Code.
  3. During the complaint, the landlord sent the resident an email addressed to someone else, regarding a complaint about balconies. It was reasonable that the landlord apologised for this error and offered compensation.
  4. The resident asked to escalate her complaint on 15 December 2024. The landlord did not acknowledge this until 26 February 2025 and issued its stage 2 response on 25 March 2025. This was around 48 working days outside the 20 working days target at stage 2 of the complaints process. This was unreasonable and would have likely caused the resident to incur unnecessary time and trouble.
  5. In its stage 2 response, the landlord acknowledged the delay and poor communication. It apologised and awarded £165 for complaint handling in total. Comprising of £25 at stage 1 and £140 at stage 2 of its complaints process.
  6. In summary, the landlord’s acknowledgement, apology, and compensation were reasonable. The amount of £165 was proportionate for the time and trouble likely incurred and within the amounts set out in our remedies guidance for situations where there was a failure which adversely affected the resident, but there was no permanent impact. Therefore, the landlord’s actions in relation to its complaint handling amounts to reasonable redress.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the resident which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord must complete the following orders and provide evidence of compliance to us:
    1. A senior member of the landlord’s staff must apologise to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The apology should be in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on apologies (available on our website).
    2. Provide the resident and us with an action plan detailing the timeline for completing the repairs recommended by the independent surveyor on 1 April 2025. The landlord must explain if it is unable to complete any repairs recommended by the surveyor.
    3. Pay the resident total compensation of £525 broken down as follows:
      1. £125 previously offered in its stage 2 complaint response in relation to the damp and mould issues if not already paid.
      2. Additional £400 for any likely distress and inconvenience caused by its failures identified in relation to its handling of her reports of damp, and mould in the property.
      3. This compensation must be paid directly to the resident and not offset against any arrears where they exist.

Recommendation

  1. We recommend that the landlord:
    1. Pays the resident the £165 compensation previously offered in its stage 2 complaint response on 25 March 2025 if it has not already done so.
    2. The finding of reasonable redress for its handling of the resident’s complaint is dependent on the payment of this sum.