London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202503931)
|
Decision |
|
|
Case ID |
202503931 |
|
Decision type |
Investigation |
|
Landlord |
London & Quadrant Housing Trust |
|
Landlord type |
Housing Association |
|
Occupancy |
Assured Tenancy |
|
Date |
23 October 2025 |
Background
- The resident is a tenant of a 1-bedroom second floor flat. The resident has a heart related health condition. The resident has complained about an outstanding repair to a broken lock on his patio door.
What the complaint is about
- The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of repairs to a balcony door.
- We have also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.
Our decision (determination)
- There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repairs to a balcony door.
- There was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.
We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.
Summary of reasons
- The repair to the balcony door has remained outstanding for over 11 months.
- There is no evidence of the landlord updating the resident about the continued delay or providing a timescale for completion.
- The landlord failed to escalate the complaint earlier and did not acknowledge this in its complaint investigation.
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.
|
Order |
What the landlord must do |
Due date |
|
1 |
Apology order
The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure:
|
No later than 20 November 2025 |
|
2 |
Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £1575 made up as follows:
This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. The landlord may deduct from the total figure any payments it has already paid.
|
No later than 20 November 2025 |
|
3 |
Completing the works The landlord must take all steps to ensure the work is completed promptly and in any event by the due date. If the landlord cannot complete the works by this date using its own contractor it must secure the services of an external contractor to do the works. If the landlord cannot complete the works in this time, it must explain to us, by the due date:
|
No later than 20 November 2025 |
|
4 |
The landlord must confirm to the resident in writing how it will compensate for any additional repair delays from the date of this report until the repair is completed. |
No later than 20 November 2025 |
|
5 |
The landlord is to complete a review of its handling of the repair. To include the delay, its communication, and its oversight of the repair. |
No later than 04 December 2025 |
Recommendations
Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.
|
Our recommendations |
|
The landlord should review its staff training needs in regard to the importance of communicating with residents throughout the repair process. |
Our investigation
The complaint procedure
|
Date |
What happened |
|
22 November 2024 |
The landlord raised a repair to a broken balcony door lock. |
|
3 February 2025 |
A contractor attended to repair the lock. It told the landlord it needed to replace the balcony door and it provided a quote. |
|
6 February 2025 |
The resident complained to the landlord about the outstanding repair. The resident wanted compensation for loss of earnings because he had been unable to attend work and leave his home insecure. He said his rent arrears were due to this. |
|
20 February 2025 |
The landlord responded at stage 1. The landlord said:
|
|
19/03/2025 |
The resident competed an online complaint form. He said he was unhappy with the complaint outcome and the compensation offered. The resident said his property was unlocked and he had missed work and was getting into rent arrears. |
|
24 April 2025 |
The landlord sent its final response. The landlord confirmed there was a delay with it approving the work. It apologised and offered further compensation of £310, broken down as £60 right to repair, £50 for time and effort, and £200 for distress and inconvenience. The landlord said it would compensate further once the repair was complete. |
|
Referral to the Ombudsman |
The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and brought the complaint to us. He said the repairs remained unresolved and the compensation was not enough. |
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.
|
Complaint |
Handling of repairs to a balcony door |
|
Finding |
Maladministration |
- We do not investigate complaints where it would be quicker, fairer, more reasonable or more effective to seek a remedy through the court, tribunal or other procedure. In this case, the complaint about the claim for a loss of earnings is better dealt with by the court given their powers and expertise.
- The resident told us the situation had a detrimental impact on his health. It would be fairer, more reasonable and more effective for the resident to make a personal injury claim for any injury caused. The courts are best placed to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide on the cause of any injury and how long it will last. We’ve not investigated this further. We can decide if a landlord should pay compensation for distress and inconvenience.
- The landlord accepted its repair responsibility in the tenancy agreement for external doors. However, the repair to the balcony door has remained outstanding for almost 11 months. The timeframe here is significantly beyond the 25-day timeframe in the landlord’s repairs policy.
- In its final response, the landlord said the delay was due to it needing approval and its contractor making amendments to the job. Its records show this was the case between February and April 2025. However, this did not explain the initial delay in attending the repair. It took 73 days to initially attend and diagnose the problem. The landlord failed to retain an adequate oversight of the repair once it had instructed its contractor.
- Repairs can require follow up appointments, parts and quotes, as was the case here. However, basic customer service is to keep in contact and provide updates on the progress of the work, and the reasons for delays. There was no evidence the landlord did so. The resident took the time and trouble to follow up multiple times. This poor communication continued after the end of the complaints process.
- The resident said he told the landlord the balcony door was insecure due to a broken lock caused by another resident attempting to access his property. He said he could not attend work because he did not want to leave his home unsecure. A work order from 22 November 2024 noted the balcony door lock was broken but “secure at the minute.” There is no record of the initial repair report, why the landlord categorised the repair as routine, or why the door was considered secure.
- The landlord failed to investigate temporary security measures while repairs were pending. Difficulties in keeping a property secure against unauthorised entry is a security hazard. The landlord has a responsibility to ensure its properties are free from hazards. It failed to do so. The resident raised this concern again in April and June 2025, but there is no evidence the landlord responded. This was a further failure.
- The action plan at stage 2 to complete the repairs did not happen. The resident contacted the landlord in June 2025 to request an update. The landlord said it had raised the repair to a new contractor. Its records show the new contractor was instructed on 7 August 2025. The works order stated it was to survey the windows and doors which suggests this is an inspection and not the repair as promised. There is no evidence of a further update to the resident after this date. The landlord failed to adequately monitor the repair to completion. The resident said he has not received any further updates and his balcony door lock remains broken.
- The resident is unhappy with the compensation offered by the landlord. He told the landlord he had rent arrears as a result of the situation. The landlord said it was unable to compensate for a loss of earnings. This response was in line with its compensation policy. It said the resident was liable for rent, which is correct under the terms of the tenancy agreement.
- Given that at stage 2 it was not clear when it would complete the repair, it was reasonable for the landlord to promise it would compensate further once it had. The overall compensation for the repair delays did not go far enough to account for the failings we have identified, the time the repair has remained outstanding and the distress and inconvenience this caused the resident.
- Overall, the landlord did not act in line with policies and obligations. It failed to repair the door as promised in its final response. This has caused the resident significant distress and inconvenience about the security of his property. We have ordered compensation in line with our remedies guidance for where there was a failure which has had a significant impact on the resident.
|
Complaint |
The handling of the complaint |
|
Finding |
Service failure |
- The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) April 2024 requires landlords to acknowledge a complaint within 5 days and respond to stage 1 and 2 complaints within 10 and 20 working days, respectively. The landlord has a published complaints policy which complies with the timescales in the Code.
- The landlord apologised for the delay acknowledging the complaint at stage 1. The resident raised his complaint on 6 February 2025. The landlord contacted the resident to discuss his complaint within 5 working days, however it did not send him an acknowledgement. The landlord responded at stage 1 within its 10-day timeframe.
- The resident told the landlord on 20 February 2025 that he was unhappy with the response and the compensation offered, and he was proceeding with a solicitor. The resident clearly stated he was dissatisfied with the stage 1 response. There was also no evidence at this stage that legal proceedings has started. Therefore, the landlord should have escalated his complaint in line with the Code. Its failure to do so caused an additional delay in the complaints process. The resident also had to take the time and trouble to follow up again about his dissatisfaction with the stage 1 response.
- The landlord escalated the resident’s complaint on 26 March 2025 after the resident completed the online complaint form on 19 March 2025. It issued its final response in line with its timescales and the Code, 20 working days later on 24 April 2025.
- The landlord did not demonstrate it had taken learning from the complaint because it did not explain the initial delays to the repairs. It also failed to identify that it should have escalated the resident’s complaint sooner. Therefore, the compensation offered for complaint handling did not go far enough to remedy the additional failings.
Learning
- We’ve have asked the landlord to complete a learning review. The landlord failed to retain an oversight over its contractors and robust procedures to ensure that it can meet its repair timescales. In particular when raising repairs, ensuring timely attendance to jobs, approving works and getting approved works executed. The landlord needs to know why these failures occurred.
Communication
- The landlord failed to keep the resident updated on the progress of the repair and the delays. This has continued following the end of the complaints process.