London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) (202212402)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202212402

London & Quadrant Housing Trust

8 August 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 a property transfer and the size of the second bedroom at the property.
  2. The Ombudsman has also looked at the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The tenancy agreement states that the property is a two-bedroom flat.
  2. On 15 March 2022, the resident submitted a formal complaint to the landlord. She explained that she was moved into a one-bedroom property from a two-bedroom property. The resident stated that the second bedroom in the property was too small to be classed as a bedroom. She explained to the landlord that she did not accept its response that she should apply to do a mutual exchange.
  3. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 23 May 2022. The landlord explained that it was in the process of completing a bedroom change request form. It stated that the completed form and paperwork from the surveyor who carried out the inspection would be passed onto the assistant director to action. The landlord stated that the issue of the size of the second bedroom, would need to be resolved, before it could deal with the resident’s transfer issue as it would need to establish whether the resident was allocated the wrong size bedroom for her household. The landlord stated to the resident if she had not received an update within the next 6-8 weeks, she could contact the landlord to re-open the complaint.
  4. On 1 June 2022, the resident requested for her complaint to be escalated to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaints process. The resident stated that the complaint had not been resolved and her request to receive an immediate transfer had not been fulfilled.
  5. On 26 September 2022, the landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response. The landlord explained that it reviewed the measurements taken by its surveyor for the second bedroom and stated that the property was considered a two-bedroom property. The landlord explained that overcrowding is determined by law using two standards: the room standard and the space standard. The room standard is about how many people have to share a room and the space standard is primarily about the floor space of the rooms. For both standards, all rooms in which you could sleep in the property are counted, including living or dining rooms. The landlord stated, as there are additional living spaces, it is determined that there is not an instance of overcrowding. The landlord stated to the resident if she was dissatisfied with the property, she would need to pursue a mutual exchange.
  6. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and submitted her complaint to the Ombudsman. She stated that her desired outcome was for the landlord to inspect the property and ensure that is correctly categorised. Also, she explained that she would like the landlord to adjust her rent in accordance with the categorisation of the property as having one bedroom. Finally, the resident also stated that she would like to be rehoused due to the size of the property.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of a property transfer

  1. The landlord’s allocations and lettings policy states that the landlord will consider the property unsuitable if it is too small or too large for the household in accordance with the bedroom entitlement section of its allocation policy. Or if the household will be overcrowded as defined by the Housing Act 1985.
  2. The bedroom entitlement section of the landlord’s allocations and letting policy explains that the number of bedrooms to which an applicant is entitled will be determined by the household composition. The policy states that the following occupants are expected to share:
    1. Every adult couple.
    2. Two children under the age of 18 (of the same gender).
    3. Two children under the age of 10 (regardless of gender).
  3. The tenancy agreement provided by the landlord states that the property is a two-bedroom flat. However, the resident has raised concerns that the property has been registered incorrectly by the landlord and believes her property should be considered as a one-bedroom property. The resident believes the second room is too small to be considered a bedroom. The resident transferred to the property in April 2019. She raised concerns about the size of the second bedroom following a fire which happened in the room. The resident stated that she was advised by the fire brigade to arrange for the second bedroom to be assessed as she was told it was too small to be a bedroom. There is no evidence to suggest that the resident raised any concerns about the second bedroom with the landlord at the time she agreed to the property transfer.
  4. The landlord agreed for its surveyor to attend the resident’s property and measure the second bedroom in January 2022. The measurements of the bedroom were reviewed, and the property was still considered as a two-bedroom property. This Service is not aware of any legal guidance or regulations that relate specifically to room size requirements for a property which is let on a single tenancy agreement and is formed of a single household. The resident’s property does not fall within the regulations of a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) which would require a bedroom to be a minimum of 6.51 square meters (70 square feet). Therefore, the Ombudsman believes that the landlord took reasonable steps in response to the resident’s concerns about the second bedroom. The landlord showed it investigated the resident’s concerns and explained the reasons for its decision clearly.
  5. The Ombudsman recognises at the time the resident transferred to the property, there were two occupants of the property which included the resident and her son. However, in February 2022, the resident informed the landlord that she was pregnant which would have resulted in the number of occupants of the property increasing to three. Even with the number of occupants at the property increasing to three, the property would still not be considered as overcrowded in line with the landlord’s allocations and lettings policy as there was additional living space available at the property, such as a living room.
  6. This service acknowledges that the size of the property may not have met the resident’s expectations. However, it is recognised and expected that when the landlord dealt with the transfer request it would have taken into consideration the resident’s housing needs as well as the circumstances which led to the transfer being required. In this instance, the resident was escaping anti-social behaviour therefore the safeguarding of the resident would have been one of the most important considerations for the landlord when identifying a suitable property. In addition to this, the offer of a property would have been dependent on the stock the landlord had available to offer at the time. The landlord explained in its stage 2 complaint response that the resident could apply for a mutual exchange if she believed the property was unsuitable. The resident may also be able to register on the local authority’s housing list, although as above the resident’s household would not be classed as overcrowded based the criteria used by the landlord and local authorities. The landlord does not operate its own housing list and therefore it would not be able to allocate another property to the resident. The landlord can only offer alternative properties without going through the local authority’s housing list in extreme circumstances such as to those fleeing harassment and/or violence or who cannot safely remain in their current property for medical reasons.
  7. There has been no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of a property transfer and the size of the second bedroom at the property. The landlord has shown that it has investigated this matter and responded appropriately to the resident’s concerns.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

  1. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) sets out the Ombudsman’s expectations for landlords’ complaint handling practices. The Code states that a stage 1 response should be provided within ten working days of the complaint. It also explains that a stage 2 response should be provided within 20 working days from the request to escalate the complaint. The landlord’s complaints policy includes the same timescales which are referenced in the Code.
  2. The resident submitted a complaint to the landlord on 15 March 2022 about the property she had been transferred to and the size of the second bedroom. It then took over 2 months for the landlord to provide its stage 1 complaint response, which was issued on 23 May 2022. The response time was late and not compliant with the timescales referenced in the landlord’s complaints policy or the Code.
  3. It also took over three months for the landlord to provide its stage 2 complaint response. On 1 June 2022, the resident contacted the landlord and requested for her complaint to be escalated to the next stage of the landlord’s complaints process. The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 26 September 2022. The delay would have caused inconvenience for the resident as the Ombudsman had to chase the landlord for a response, and the resident was delayed in progressing the complaint to the Ombudsman because she needed to wait for the landlord’s final response before contacting our service.
  4. Given the delay in the landlord providing its stage 1 and 2 complaint responses. It would be appropriate for the landlord to pay the resident £200 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused.  The amount of compensation is appropriate to recognise the significant delay the resident experienced. The amount of compensation awarded is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance (published on our website), which sets out the Ombudsman’s approach to compensation. The remedies guidance suggests awards of £100 to £600 where there has been a failure which adversely affected the resident but there was no permanent impact. In this case, although the delay would have been inconvenient, there may be no permanent impact to the resident, as she eventually received a final response letter from the landlord and was able to submit her complaint to the Ombudsman.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s property transfer.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders

  1. The landlord to pay the resident £200 compensation for errors in its complaint handling.
  2. This payment should be made to the resident within four weeks of the date of this report.