London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) (202210143)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202210143

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

16 October 2023

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:
   1. Repairs to the resident’s bathroom.
   2. The associated complaint.

Background

2. The resident has an assured tenancy and lives in a house.
3. The landlord’s records show it carried out an inspection of the resident’s bathroom in September 2021. Following a number of calls and emails to the landlord regarding the bathroom works, the resident logged a complaint on 10 March 2022. The resident stated she was unhappy that the landlord had not provided her with a date for when the bathroom renewal would be taking place.
4. The landlord provided the resident with a stage one complaint response on 11 March 2022. It stated that since March 2020, the Covid-19 pandemic had limited the works the landlord could carry out and for many months, the landlord could only carry out emergency repair works. The landlord advised this had led to a build-up of outstanding repairs, which it was still working through. The landlord stated it would not be able to offer the resident a date for her bathroom renewal and its planning team would notify her when the renewal was possible. The landlord apologised for not being able to complete the works and advised that if a repair was required, it would raise works to rectify the repair.
5. The resident continued to regularly contact the landlord for an update on her bathroom. On 24 May 2022 the resident told the landlord that she had received a letter from its contractor regarding the bathroom, which stated that only the bathtub and the basin would be replaced. The resident queried this because she was previously told her bathroom would be fully renewed. The surveyor called the resident on 28 May 2022 and advised that following the inspection, the toilet was not deemed to be faulty and the bathroom wall tiles and flooring were okay. Therefore, works had been raised to only renew the bathtub and basin. The resident advised she had previously reported an issue with the toilet flush not working. The surveyor advised works for the renewal of the toilet would be raised.
6. On 6 July 2022 the resident contacted the landlord to make a new complaint following and appointment attended by a contractor. She was unhappy no works had been carried out and stated the operative told her that they would only be inspecting the bathroom. The resident stated the operative had been rude and she was frustrated because the bathroom had already been inspected and she wanted the works to be carried out as soon as possible.
7. Following the landlord’s conversation with the resident, it sent her a stage one complaint response on 6 July 2022. It apologised for the inconvenience caused and explained that its area supervisor had reviewed the bathroom repair report and advised the bathtub and basin did not need to be replaced. The landlord stated it would be investigating the operative’s conduct internally and advised it had asked the surveyor who previously inspected the bathroom to contact the resident. The landlord sent the resident a £30 shopping voucher as a gesture of goodwill and confirmed that as per its earlier conversation with the resident, her complaint had been escalated to the second stage of its complaints process.
8. The Ombudsman wrote to the landlord on 20 August 2022 because it had not provided the resident with a stage two complaint response. The Ombudsman asked the landlord to provide the resident with a complaint response within 20 working days. The landlord sent the resident another acknowledgement of her escalation request on 23 August 2022.
9. On 14 September 2022 the resident called the landlord to express her frustrations after she had received a call from the contractors stating they would not be attending the appointment scheduled for that day because it did not cover her area. The landlord contacted the resident on 20 September 2022 and advised there would be a delay to it providing the resident with a final response. The landlord stated it wanted to make sure it had organised the required bathroom works adequately and was awaiting a response from one of its contractors. It advised that it expected to have an answer for the resident by 4 October 2022.
10. The landlord contacted the resident and the Ombudsman on 12 October 2022 and advised that it had rescheduled the bathroom works to another contractor and a provisional date of 20 October 2022 had been booked in for the works to be carried out. The landlord apologised for the delay and advised it would be able to provide compensation for the entirety of the complaint following the successful attendance of the appointment.
11. On 19 October 2022 the landlord provided the resident with a stage two complaint response. The landlord stated it had tried to arrange the repair works several times but due to contractor capacity, it had been unsuccessful. It advised arrangements had been made with another contractor to complete the works and provided the resident with the job reference number. The landlord stated it was unable to confirm an appointment date at that time because of the contractor’s capacity but it would monitor the repair through to completion. The landlord apologised for the delay with providing a stage two complaint response and for the length of time taken to progress the bathroom repairs. The landlord offered the resident £200 compensation in recognition of any trouble or upset caused.
12. The resident continued to chase the landlord for the repairs to be carried out between October 2022 and January 2023. The resident stated she was fed up with being ignored and fobbed off and she felt the repair delays were a ploy not to carry out the works because the property was shortly due to be transferred to a different landlord. The resident advised she had been waiting for over a year for works to be carried out to the bathroom.
13. On 19 January 2023 a plumber attended and advised the taps would not be changed along with the bathtub and basin. The resident told the landlord the cold water tap for the basin was crumbling and the bathtub mixer tap was leaking. The operative was due to reattend for follow-on works.
14. The resident contacted the Ombudsman because she was disappointed that the landlord had not put a plan in place for the works to the bathroom to be carried out. She also felt the landlord had not taken her concerns seriously and the plan for the required works had changed from the bathroom initially having a full renewal to repairs to the toilet, sink and bath. As a resolution the resident wanted the tiles, fixtures, lights and décor to be renewed along with the bathtub, basin and toilet. The resident was also seeking compensation for the continued delay to the works being carried out.
15. In July 2023 the landlord told the Ombudsman it had been unable to arrange the bathroom repair after the stage two complaint response because of its contractor’s capacity. The outstanding repair request had subsequently been rejected and not carried out because the property was transferred to a different landlord as part of a stock transfer.
16. The resident confirmed her new landlord installed a new bathroom around July 2023.

Assessment and findings

17. When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its Dispute Resolution Principles. These are high level good practice guidance developed from the Ombudsman’s experience of resolving disputes, for use by everyone involved in the complaints process. There are three principles driving effective dispute resolution:
    1. Be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair processes;
    2. Put things right, and;
    3. Learn from outcomes.
18. The Ombudsman must first consider whether a failing on the part of the landlord occurred, and if so, whether this led to any adverse effect or detriment to the resident. If it is found that a failing did lead to an adverse effect the investigation will then consider whether the landlord has taken enough action to ‘put things right’ and ‘learn from outcomes’.

Scope of investigation

19. The resident has stated the worn bath enamel caused her daughter’s shingles to flare up and her grandson to suffer from a rash. The service does not doubt the resident’s comments about the impacts on her family’s health. However, it is outside our remit to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. This would be more appropriately dealt with as a personal injury claim through the courts or liability insurance. The Ombudsman’s decision not to consider this aspect of the resident’s complaint is within accordance of paragraph 42(g) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme), which says “the Ombudsman will not consider complaints which concern matters where the Ombudsman considers it quicker, fairer, more reasonable or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts, a designated person, other tribunal or procedure”. The Service has considered the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident and her family as well as the landlord’s response to the concerns she had raised about her family’s health.

Policies and procedures

20. The tenancy agreement states the landlord will keep in good repair and working order any installations it has provided for space heating, water heating and sanitation and for the supply of water, gas and electricity, including basins, sinks, baths, toilets, flushing systems and waste pipes.
21. Under ‘Right to repair’ the tenancy states the resident has the right to have qualifying repairs carried out by the landlord which, if not carried out within a specified period of time are likely to jeopardise the health, safety or security of the resident. The tenancy advises that if the landlord failed to undertake a repair requested under this procedure within the initial specified time and (after a further request from the resident) fails to complete the works within the second specified period, the resident shall be entitled to compensation.
22. The landlord’s repairs policy states its aim is to undertake repairs for which it has a responsibility, to a good standard in a reasonable timeframe. The policy states that for routine day to day repairs, the landlord will aim to complete the repair at the earliest mutually convenient appointment.
23. The component renewal referrals procedure outlines instructions for staff on making referrals for the replacement of components when they are no longer economic to repair and not already scheduled for planned replacement. If it is identified during a routine repair appointment that the landlord is unable to economically repair a component, it must complete any remedial works that are required in order to address and immediate health and safety hazards or raise further jobs to make safe if they are unable to carry these out at the time. In order for a bathroom to meet the criteria for replacement, it could not meet the decent homes standard. A major repair or replacement would require two or more items (bath, wash hand basin and/or WC). If a renewal is not authorised, due to it not being an urgent requirement, the landlord should make recommendations for routine repairs as required and arrange these with the resident.
24. The landlord’s compensation policy states it will award £10 for its failure to respond to a query within ten working days, where it is identified as part of a complaint investigation and £20 for its failure to keep an appointment without at least 24 hours’ notice. The landlord will also award discretionary compensation when its mistake or failure causes a customer distress and inconvenience and/or the need to spend unnecessary time and effort in getting the landlord to put things right.
25. The landlord’s complaints policy states compensation awards between 1 April 2020 and 6 September 2021 were treated differently following restrictions it introduced due to the Coronavirus pandemic. The policy advises the landlord will aim to provide a stage one complaint response within ten working days and a stage two complaint response within 20 working days.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s bathroom

26. The landlord’s records show it carried out an inspection of the resident’s bathroom on 29 September 2021. The landlord has not provided any further information concerning the outcome of the inspection following the Ombudsman’s request for information regarding this. The landlord’s records in November 2021 stated a surveyor would need to assess whether the resident would need a new bathroom. The landlord has not explained why the resident was not updated following its inspection in September 2021 or why it did not determine during the initial appointment whether a new bathroom was required. The landlord refers to the resident ringing on a weekly basis for an update on the bathroom renewal in January 2022. It also outlined the repair issues of the worn enamel in the bathtub, discoloured toilet and a small crack in the basin from the September 2021 inspection. The landlord did not carry out any works and the repair was subsequently cancelled in February 2022, after the operative who had inspected the bathroom stated the bathroom was in a good working condition and there was only a pinhead sized chip in the basin. There are no records of the landlord updating the resident about the cancelled works.
27. In responding to the resident’s stage one complaint in March 2022, the landlord made reference to the bathroom renewal instead of confirming that the works had been cancelled. The landlord failed to act within accordance of its component renewal referrals procedure, which states that if a renewal is not required the landlord should make recommendations for routine repairs, as required and arrange these with the resident. The resident was not made aware that her bathroom would not be fully renewed until May 2022, and this was only after she called the landlord to query why she had received a letter from the contractor stating that just her bathtub and basin would be replaced. The landlord should have been proactive in keeping the resident updated at a much earlier stage and explained to her why her bathroom was not being renewed. This would have helped to manage the resident’s expectations about the type of repairs that would be carried out and prevented her from having to continuously contacting the landlord for updates, which would have been frustrating and inconvenient for the resident.
28. In addition, the landlord failed to provide clear details and timeframes for the completion of the bathroom repairs. The landlord may not have been able to provide the resident with an appointment date when it responded to the stage one complaint, but it should have provided her with a schedule of contact for when it would update her regarding the bathroom repairs. The landlord missed the opportunity to demonstrate to the resident that it was actively trying to complete the bathroom repairs. This would have prevented her from needing to continuously chasing the landlord for updates, which would have been frustrating to the resident.
29. The landlord’s repairs policy states it would undertake repairs within a reasonable amount of time. The Ombudsman deems one calendar month to be a reasonable amount of time to complete a routine repair, although it is recognised that some repairs may take longer for example if materials need to be ordered. The landlord’s records show it was made aware on 28 May 2022 that the resident was not able to flush her toilet. An operative attended on 6 July 2022 but did not carry out any works because they stated the bathroom was in a very good working condition and there were no health and safety issues. The landlord appears to have held contradictory information about the condition of the bathroom on its records. It is not clear why the landlord continued to raise the same works to renew the bathtub, basin and toilet after its contractors stated they were all in good working condition. Instead, the landlord could have raised amended works to fix the toilet flush, the bathtub enamel and the small chip in the basin. In order to establish the exact repairs that needed to be carried out, the landlord could have arranged a joint inspection between its surveyor, contractor and the resident. This would have given all parties the opportunity to discuss any discrepancies and ensured all parties were aware of the exact works that would be carried out.
30. The landlord re-raised the bathroom repair to a number of different contractors between July 2022 and October 2022, but works were not carried out. Throughout this time the resident had continuously contacted the landlord for updates and had tried contacting contractors to arrange appointments for the works. The resident was given incorrect information by contractors regarding the requirement for her to supply the bathroom materials and had works raised to contractors who did not cover her area. The landlord has not provided any evidence to show that it considered escalating the issue to senior management to try and get the repairs progressed, which the Ombudsman would have expected, given the substantial period of time the bathroom repairs had been outstanding for and the resident’s ongoing complaint.
31. It appears operatives attended the property in November 2022 and January 2023, on both occasions no repair works were carried out. The landlord has not provided evidence to show it carried out any works to the bathroom from September 2021 until the property was transferred in 2023. The landlord had demonstrated a consistent pattern of service failures throughout its handling of the bathroom repair. The landlord failed to change its approach in tackling the outstanding repairs or conduct a proper investigation into why its contractors would not carry out the works, despite the repeated failures in the repairs being completed. This approach led to a prolonged period of distress and frustration for the resident, which may have been avoided. The Ombudsman finds the landlord had provided a poor level of service to the resident throughout the entire period the repairs were outstanding.
32. The Ombudsman’s approach to compensation is set out in our Remedies Guidance (published on our website). The remedies guidance states the Ombudsman may award up to £600 in cases where the landlord has made errors which caused significant distress and/or inconvenience to the resident but there may be no permanent impact from these errors. The compensation offered by the landlord did not fully reflect the full extent of its service failures or the added inconvenience caused by the bathroom works not being carried out. The landlord should pay the resident an additional £300 compensation in recognition of its service failures and the distress and inconvenience caused by its failure to carry out the bathroom repairs.

Complaint handling

33. The landlord provided the resident with a stage one response on the same date she had logged a new complaint about the lack of repairs to her bathroom. Whilst the landlord addressed some aspects of the complaint and apologised to the resident for the inconvenience caused, it failed to provide the resident with a resolution. The landlord failed to confirm what type of works it would be carrying out to the bathroom or when the works would be scheduled. Instead, the landlord’s complaint response stated its surveyor would be contacting the resident to discuss the outstanding issues. Given the length of time the complained about issue had been on-going with little progress, the Ombudsman deems this as unacceptable. The landlord should have outlined the exact works that it would be carrying out to the bathroom and detail when the works were likely to be taking place to give the resident some peace of mind. The landlord had ten working days to provide the resident with a complaint response, which is a reasonable amount of time to fully investigate the complaint, obtain all relevant information and provide the resident with a plan of action. The landlord would have then been in the position to provide the resident with a comprehensive complaint response that addressed the complaint issue and provided a resolution.
34. The landlord confirmed with the resident that her complaint would be escalated to the second stage of its complaints process on 7 July 2022. Its internal records show the landlord had been investigating the resident’s complaint at the second stage of its complaint process in early August 2022. However, the landlord failed to respond to the resident’s stage two complaint within accordance of its complaints policy. Due to this the Ombudsman had to contact the landlord on 20 August 2022 to ask it to provide a stage two response.
35. The landlord contacted the resident on 20 September 2022 to advise there would be a delay in providing a stage two response because it wanted to make sure it organised the required works adequately. However, this update was sent 52 working days after the resident’s escalation request. This is not in line with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the code) which sets out our service’s expectations for landlords’ complaint handling practices. The code states “exceptionally, landlords may provide an explanation to the resident containing a clear timeframe for when the response will be received. This should not exceed a further 10 days without good reason”.
36. The resident did not receive a stage two response until 19 October 2022, 73 working days after her original escalation request was submitted. Although the Ombudsman had asked the landlord to provide the resident with a stage two response within 20 working days, the landlord’s records clearly show it was already aware of the resident’s escalation request. The landlord has not explained why it started the 20-working day response timeframe from the date the Ombudsman contacted it and not the date of the original escalation request. The delay would have significantly inconvenienced the resident because she was left without a response for a sustained period of time while the repair issues were on-going.
37. The stage two response acknowledged the landlord’s failure to get the bathroom works carried out and explained the landlord’s contractors still had capacity issues. Considering the length of time that the bathroom repairs and the resident’s complaint had been outstanding for, the landlord should have been more proactive in securing an appointment for the resident at the time it issued the response. The landlord did not give an explanation for why, over a year later, there were still issues with its contractor capacity or when the matter was likely to be resolved. This would have been frustrating and distressing to the resident, who had been asking for works to be carried out throughout this period. The landlord failed to carry out any works to rectify the bathroom and it did not resolve the resident’s complaint.
38. The service considers that the landlord had demonstrated poor complaint handling and did not follow its complaints process or the code. In accordance with the Service’s remedies guidance as set out above, the landlord should pay the resident £200 compensation in recognition of its failure to meet its service standards in complaint handling and its failure in resolving the complaint. The compensation recognises the landlord’s failure to put things right in relation to its delay in providing the resident with a stage two complaint response and its failure to fully respond to the complain by explaining the reasons for the continued delays to the bathroom repairs.

Determination

39. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect to its handling of the resident’s bathroom repair.
40. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

41. The landlord is to pay the resident £500 in compensation, broken down as follows:
    1. £300 for the additional failures identified with its handling of the bathroom repair. This is in addition to the £200 compensation offered by the landlord previously through its complaints process which should now be paid as well unless it has already been paid.
    2. £200 for the failures identified with its complaint handling.
42. The landlord to provide the resident with a written apology for delays and a lack of clear communication concerning the bathroom repair.
43. The compensation awarded by this Service should be treated separately from any existing financial arrangements between the landlord and resident and should not be offset against any service charges or rent arrears.
44. The landlord is to confirm compliance with the above orders within four weeks of the date of this decision.

Recommendations

45. The Ombudsman recommends the landlord review its repairs policy and include timeframes for non-urgent repairs. If it has not done so already, the landlord should also review the additional recommendations regarding its repairs policy as outlined in the Ombudsman’s special report about the landlord (published on our website in July 2023).
46. The Ombudsman recommends the landlord appoints a member of its governing body to have lead responsibility for complaints and support a positive complaint handling culture, in compliance with the Complaint Handling Code, if this has not been completed already, in line with the special report.
47. The Ombudsman recommends the landlord complete the planned roll out of refreshed complaint handling training and design a programme of regular periodic refresher training, if this has not been completed already, in line with the special report.