London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) (202231070)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202231070

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

5 November 2024

 

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 response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident has an assured tenancy with the landlord which is a housing association. The tenancy commenced on 29 January 2016.
  2. The property is a one bedroom ground floor flat. The landlord has not provided information as to whether the resident has any vulnerabilities.
  3. In response to a report from the resident about damp and mould on 14 January 2022, the landlord raised a works order on the same day to assess levels of damp in the property. Following an inspection a further works order was raised on 16 January to carry out a mould wash and redecorate the bathroom. A mould wash was carried out on 18 January. The completion report noted that repairs were required, including cracked walls and rotten window frames. During July and August the landlord raised further works orders to address the repairs.
  4. Works to the bathroom were completed on 12 September 2022. However, on 1 December the resident contacted the landlord to report that mould was coming through again in the bathroom. A property inspection was carried out on 15 December. On 1 February 2023 the landlord confirmed it had carried out an inspection of the property and had raised necessary works orders including installing thermal boards to walls. The evidence shows that works remained outstanding as of 30 June. It is unclear whether the works have now been completed and if so when.
  5. The resident raised a formal complaint on 30 November 2022 to say that damp and mould previously treated by the landlord had returned. This investigation has not seen a copy of the complaint.
  6. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 1 December 2022, the main points being:
    1. It apologised for its late response.
    2. The resident first reported damp and mould on 14 January.
    3. On 16 January it raised a works order to carry out repairs to the bathroom which were completed on 12 September. It also completed works to the external wall.
    4. It apologised that the resident had to report that the mould had returned. The matter had been referred to the supervisor of the area to comment further and it would update the resident in due course.
  7. On 11 December 2022 the resident emailed the landlord to ask to escalate his complaint to stage 2. This investigation has not seen a copy of the email. The resident then contacted this Service for assistance and we wrote to the landlord on his behalf on 17 March 2023. The complaint was about the landlord’s response to:
    1. Severe damp in the property and crumbling walls.
    2. A broken back door.
    3. A rotten window and leaking pipe.
    4. The resident wanted his bathroom to be replaced and the outstanding repairs to be completed.
  8. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 29 March 2023, as follows:
    1. It apologised for the level of service the resident had received.
    2. Since its stage 1 complaint response it had sent “numerous emails” on the resident’s behalf to get an update on works “with no avail”. It apologised and assured the resident that it was continually reviewing its processes with the aim of improving communications with residents.
    3. It inspected the property on 26 January and would be “potentially arranging for a scaffold to be erected” and would also renew a fan and install thermal boarding.
    4. Its contractor had attended the property to assess and provide a quote. It would now need to arrange to visit the property with the contractor to review the quote and add in any additional work that may be identified on site. After that, an order would be raised to complete the repairs identified and previously quoted for. The site visit had been arranged for 2 April 2023.
    5. It acknowledged that the resident had made “numerous calls and sent numerous emails” to resolve the issue. It offered £210 compensation comprised of:
      1. £80 compensation for time and effort.
      2. £80 for distress and inconvenience.
      3. £50 goodwill gesture for the level of general communication and service.
  9. On 13 November 2023 the resident emailed this Service to set out his dissatisfaction with the landlord’s response. Works remained outstanding and the landlord had not confirmed when the issues would be resolved. He wanted the landlord to complete the repairs and acknowledge the detriment caused. The complaint became one we could investigate on 19 June 2024.

Assessment and findings

Landlord’s obligations, policies and procedures

  1. The landlord’s repairs policy says that it will complete routine day to day repairs within 25 calendar days.
  2. Its damp and mould self-assessment dated September 2022 sets out that it carries out healthy homes assessments when it receives reports of damp and mould. The purpose is to identify any repairs required and receive a clean and shield treatment to remove the damp and mould. This is monitored for 12 months following the visit, through regular communication with residents by text or telephone by its specialist contractor.
  3. Its complaints policy says it will acknowledge complaints within 5 working days. It aims to respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and to stage 2 complaints within 20 working days.
  4. Its compensation policy says it will consider paying compensation when its mistake or failure causes a resident distress and inconvenience and/or need the need to spend unnecessary time and effort in getting it to put things right.

The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould.

  1. On 14 January 2022 the landlord raised a works order to assess damp in the property in response to a report that tiles were falling off the wall and the walls were damp.
  2. A further works order was raised on 16 January 2022 to hack off the wall tiles and retile the bathroom, wash down any mould and redecorate with anti-mould paint. An order was also raised to quote for replacing the “rotten” bathroom window.
  3. On 18 January 2022 the landlord carried out a healthy homes inspection which noted that surfaces throughout the property were cleaned and treated as required. It also listed the following repairs:
    1. The rear sewage pipe was leaking from the joint.
    2. Cracks on the rear wall were allowing water ingress causing damp on the outside walls of the bathroom and kitchen.
    3. Cracks on the rear wall by the kitchen door were allowing water ingress causing damp on the outside walls of the bathroom and kitchen.
    4. Multiple cracks on the rear wall were allowing water ingress causing damp on the outside walls of bathroom and kitchen.
    5. The bathroom window frame was rotten.
    6. The main bedroom window frame was rotten and damaged.
    7. The living room window frame was rotten.
  4. The evidence shows there was email correspondence between the landlord and its contractor during May 2022 to clarify works. An entry on the landlord’s repair logs dated 8 July duplicated the order originally raised on 16 January. The repair logs show the works were completed on 14 October.
  5. It is unclear why the landlord did not carry out the works when the order was first raised on 16 January. Furthermore, it is unclear why it took a further 3 months, from July to October, to carry out works when the second order was raised. Therefore, the delay was unreasonable.
  6. An entry on the logs dated 18 August 2022 noted that the damp was caused by an issue with the pointing on the external wall by the bathroom. It needed to be rectified because it was causing water ingress. The work is shown as completed on 28 October.
  7. The landlord’s contractor had identified the same repair during its healthy homes inspection on 18 January. The landlord had raised the order for works within 10 days of the inspection in line with its damp and mould self-assessment. However, it is unclear why it had not been progressed or why it took the landlord 2 months to carry out the works once the repair was raised a second time.
  8. Furthermore, there is no evidence that the landlord provided any updates to the resident in relation to the repairs set out above. This would have been appropriate to manage the resident’s expectations, minimising any distress caused.
  9. On 30 November 2022 the resident emailed the landlord to report that the damp and mould had returned. The landlord carried out a healthy homes inspection on 15 December in line with its damp and mould self-assessment. It noted that:
    1. The repair of a leaking rear sewage pipe was outstanding.
    2. The second bedroom window was “badly damaged.”
    3. The left hand kitchen wall was damaged and needed to be replastered due to previous water ingress from cracks on the rear wall.
    4. There was possible water ingress to the washing machine plug socket and an electrician was required. The washing machine was observed to be in working order but there appeared to be a “spark inside the socket.” The machine was left switched off for safety reasons.
    5. The repairs above were all reported on the same day, 15 December.
    6. A list of recent repairs included:
      1. The bathroom window had been replaced with double glazing.
      2. Cracks on the rear wall had been fixed and painted.
      3. Tiles in the bathroom had been fixed and decorated
    7. The resident had been advised to follow ‘clean as you go’ policy should new mould appear.
    8. Mould had returned on previously treated areas. On this occasion the landlord had completed a full clean and ‘shield’ for the entire property.
  10. The leak from the sewage pipe was first identified on 18 January 2022, that it had not been repaired almost 12 months later was inappropriate. Following the healthy homes report, internal emails were sent on 30 December and 11 January 2023 to seek an update to be passed onto the resident accordingly.
  11. An internal email of 12 January 2023 confirmed that the landlord needed to carry out a further inspection to understand why the mould returned. A request was made for the relevant team to confirm the date of the inspection. This was chased on 26 and 31 January and 1 February.
  12. An internal email dated 1 February 2023 advised that the inspection had been carried out. The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response dated 29 March confirmed the date of the inspection as 26 January. It said that works orders had been raised to carry out repairs including erecting scaffolding, renewing a fan and installing thermal board to the walls.
  13. However, ongoing internal emails stated that works orders had not been raised causing further emails to be sent on 7 and 14 February, 2, 8, 17, and 21 March 2023 to chase. On 22 March an internal email confirmed that a further site visit needed to be carried out with the contractor which was booked for 4 April.
  14. It is unclear why it took the landlord 4 months from the date of the resident’s complaint to reach this point. Therefore its delay was unreasonable.
  15. A works order was raised on 30 June 2023 to carry out all the outstanding works. It is unclear whether the works were completed and if so, when. In any event, it had taken the landlord 6 months to progress from the healthy homes inspection on 15 December 2022 to raising relevant works orders which was unreasonable.
  16. The landlord’s damp and mould self-assessment says that actions carried out during and arising from its healthy homes assessments will be monitored for 12 months by its contractor by phone or text. There is no evidence that this took place after the assessments in January and December 2022 which was inappropriate.
  17. In its stage 2 complaint response of 29 March 2023 the landlord apologised. It acknowledged that the resident had made “numerous calls and sent numerous emails” to resolve the issue. The landlord has failed to provide evidence of the calls and emails which is a record keeping failure.
  18. The Ombudsman would expect a landlord to keep a robust record of contacts yet the evidence has not been comprehensive in this case. It is vital that landlords keep clear, accurate and easily accessible records to provide an audit trail. If we investigate a complaint, we will ask for the landlord’s records. If there is disputed evidence and no audit trail, we may not be able to conclude that an action took place or that the landlord followed its own policies and procedures.
  19. The landlord said it was continually reviewing its processes to improve its communication with residents. While it was positive that the landlord apologised and recognised the need to learn from the complaint, there is no evidence that it did so.
  20. The landlord offered £210 compensation comprised of:
    1. £80 compensation for time and effort.
    2. £80 for distress and inconvenience.
    3. £50 goodwill gesture for the level of general communication and service.
  21. The landlord’s failures amount to maladministration because they had an adverse effect on the resident. The amount of compensation offered by the landlord is not proportionate to the failures identified by this investigation. The landlord has been ordered to pay the resident £500 compensation which is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance where there was no permanent impact. The landlord may deduct the £210 it has offered if this has already been paid.

The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

  1. The resident made a stage 1 complaint on 30 November 2022. The landlord provided its response the following day, 1 December. Therefore, it is unclear why the landlord apologised for the delay.
  2. The Housing Ombudsman Complaint Handling Code (the Code) expects landlords to use the complaints process to resolve an issue before it gets worse. A complaint should be resolved at the earliest possible opportunity, having assessed what evidence is needed to fully consider the issues, what outcome would resolve the matter for the resident and whether there are any urgent actions required.
  3. The landlord’s stage 1 complaint said it had escalated the issue to the relevant team and would update the resident accordingly. The complaint response was more of an acknowledgement of the complaint and did not provide a meaningful response on the substantive issue.
  4. Complaint responses should be issued in a timely manner but not at the expense of the effectiveness of the complaints process itself. Given that the landlord had 10 working days to respond, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have allowed time for an action plan to be established. It could have then provided this update to the resident in the complaint response. The landlord would then have used the complaints process as a means of progressing resolution of the substantive issue.
  5. Furthermore the response said the complaint was upheld but it did not set out its decision making in terms of what had gone wrong and the detriment caused to the resident. It failed to identify any learning and what it would do differently. It also failed to consider how it might put things right for the resident by referring to its compensation policy.
  6. The lack of clarity caused inconvenience, time and trouble to the resident who contacted this Service to request support. He said he had complained on 30 November 2022 and had not received a full response because he believed the response of 1 December was only an acknowledgement.
  7. We wrote to the landlord on 17 March 2023 to ask the landlord to respond. The landlord wrote to the resident on 20 March to acknowledge his request to escalate to stage 2 of the process. It issued its response on 29 March which was in line with the timescales set out in its complaints policy.
  8. The Code requires landlords to keep full records of complaints, including the original complaint and all correspondence. The landlord has been unable to provide this Service with a copy of the resident’s stage 1 complaint response dated 30 November 2022 or the resident’s request to escalate his complaint made on 11 December.
  9. This is a record keeping failure which has impacted on our investigation of the resident’s complaint. The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response sets out a summary of the issues raised by the resident by way of reply to its stage 1 complaint response. While the issues are addressed in its response, without seeing a copy of the original communication this investigation is unable to assess if its response was reasonable in the circumstances.
  10. The landlord’s complaint handling failures amount to maladministration because they had an adverse effect on the resident. The landlord has been ordered to pay the resident £125 which is consistent with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance where there was no permanent impact.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
  2. In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of the determination the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Write to the resident to:
      1. Apologise for the failures identified in the report.
      2. Confirm its position with regards to the status of works, setting out an action plan with details and timescales for any outstanding repairs.
      3. Set out the learning it referred to in its stage 2 complaint response of 29 March 2023.
    2. Pay the resident £625 compensation comprised of:
      1. £500 for distress, time and trouble caused by its failures in its response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould. The landlord may deduct the £210 it has offered if this had already been paid.
      2. £125 for distress and inconvenience caused by its complaint handling failures.