London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202508355)

Background

1. The resident lives in a flat on the fifth floor. He complained to the landlord that the communal lift was repeatedly not working. The resident said he had been trapped in the lift and he has claustrophobia. He asked the landlord to replace the lift.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:

1. Problems with the communal lift.
2. The complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We found:
   1. Maladministration in the landlord’s handling of problems with the communal lift.
   2. Service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s handling of problems with the communal lift

4. The resident’s lift continually broke down in the 12 months before he complained. He was stuck in the lift before he complained and shortly after, which caused him significant distress and inconvenience. The landlord has now agreed to replace the lift but given the potential safety concern it should have considered replacing it sooner.

The landlord’s complaint handling

5. The landlord responded to the resident’s complaint within its policy timeframes and our Complaint Handling Code (the Code). However, it did not respond to the resident’s request to call him back and he spent time chasing the landlord for a response.

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 has happened or comment on all the information we have reviewed. We have only included the key information that forms the basis of our decision of whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration.

What we have not considered

6. The resident has complained about issues dating back 16 years. However, we have not seen evidence of a formal complaint exhausting the landlord’s complaints process until 9 April 2025. In the interests of fairness, and considering the availability of evidence, this investigation is focused on events from February 2024, which the landlord addressed in both stages of the complaint process.
7. The resident complained again to the landlord in 2026 about the ongoing lift problems and other issues. The landlord responded to this at stage 1 of its complaints procedure on 4 March 2026. It offered further compensation for the recurring problems in 2025. As this complaint has not exhausted the landlord’s complaints procedure, we have not considered its handling of this. The resident may escalate this complaint to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaints process if he is unhappy with its response.

What we have considered

8. We have considered the landlord’s handling of lift problems from February 2024 up to the end of May 2025, which is when the resident referred his complaint to us. We have also considered the steps it is taking to resolve the issues to date.
9. The resident complained the lift was repeatedly breaking down and the landlord should replace it. He said he was distressed after being trapped in the lift for 25 minutes in February 2025 and he called the fire service to get him out. In its initial complaint response, the landlord confirmed 49 occurrences where the lift had broken down in the 12 months leading up to the resident’s complaint. However, it said it had no plans to replace the lift but would monitor the situation.
10. The resident’s lease says the landlord is responsible for maintaining, repairing and renewing the machinery within the premises. Its repairs policy confirms it is responsible for the communal areas and for keeping residents safe in their homes. The landlord was repeatedly called out to repair the communal lift, which serviced a 5-storey block of flats. As this was a potential health and safety issue, it should have considered renewing the lift at a much earlier stage, in line with its repairs policy.
11. The landlord attempted to put things right during the complaints process. It inspected and serviced the lift, apologised and offered £100 compensation for the distress and inconvenience it caused. As the landlord acknowledged failings, our role is to consider whether the redress it offered was in line with our dispute resolution principles which are: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
12. The resident was stuck in the lift again at the end of April 2025, within a month of responding to the complaint. He said he had a panic attack due to having claustrophobia and he called emergency services to release him. The resident told the landlord being trapped in the lift twice had a significant impact on him. He said he was 62 years old and rather than taking the lift he was climbing “approximately 100 stairs” after working 12-hour shifts. The evidence shows other residents were also stuck in the lift, yet the landlord did not reconsider replacing it until over 5 months later.
13. We found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of problems with the communal lift. The compensation it offered was not proportionate to our findings. We ordered the landlord to apologise and pay the resident £300 compensation. This amount includes £100 compensation it offered in its stage 2 complaint response. It includes an additional £200 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its delay in considering whether to replace the lift. This is in line with our compensation guidance, where the landlord’s offer was not proportionate to the failings we identified.
14. Following further lift breakdowns, in June 2026 the landlord agreed to replace the lift but has not provided a date it will do this. We have therefore ordered the landlord to start the work by 10 August 2026. If it cannot start work by this time it must explain why and provide a revised timescale of when it intends to start the works.

15. The landlord’s complaints policy outlines its definition of a complaint and its timescales for responding. It says it will record and acknowledge all complaints within 5 working days. It says it will respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and within 20 working days for stage 2 complaints. The landlord’s complaint definition and response timescales are in line with the Code.
16. The landlord offered to call the resident to discuss his complaint. He gave times he would like to be called. However, it did not respond, and the resident spent time and trouble chasing the landlord 3 times. This was not in line with its complaints policy which says it will try to reach a solution and will stay connected throughout the complaints process.
17. The landlord recorded, acknowledged and responded to the resident’s stage 1 and 2 complaints within its policy timeframes. The landlord followed the Code by addressing all parts of the resident’s complaint and clearly explained its decisions and reasoning. However, we found service failure in the landlord’s handling as it did not follow its policy by communicating with the resident throughout the complaints process.
18. We have therefore ordered the landlord to apologise in writing for its complaint handling. This remedy is in line with our compensation guidance which says the landlord must apologise if there was an issue which had minimal impact on the resident over a shorter timeframe.

Learning

19. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s stage 2 complaint twice. The landlord would benefit from issuing one complaint acknowledgement. This is to avoid confusing residents and to clearly demonstrate it sent its responses within its policy timescales.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

20. The landlord’s repair records were comprehensive. However, it did not record all its communications with the resident. The landlord would benefit from maintaining accurate records so it can better manage residents’ issues and provide a good service.

Communication

21. The landlord may want to consider reviewing its communication processes to ensure it provides an efficient service for residents. This includes letting residents know when they can expect a call back. This would better manage their expectations, so they do not have to chase issues.