From 13 January 2026, we will no longer accept new case enquiries by email. Please use our online complaint form to bring a complaint to us. This helps us respond to you more quickly.

Need help? Other ways to contact us.

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) (202300219)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202300219

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

30 April 2025

 

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 damaged kitchen floor.
    2. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The resident rents her property as a private tenant from the landlord.
  2. On 19 October 2022, the resident contacted the landlord and reported that her kitchen floor had been damaged from a leak from the boiler.
  3. On 21 November 2022, the resident contacted the landlord and submitted her complaint. She stated she was still waiting for her damaged floor to be repaired and explained the contractor did not turn up for the appointment which was booked during November 2022. In addition, the resident stated she had tried to contact the contractor several times to find out when they would be attending but had not received a response.
  4. On 7 December 2022, the resident contacted the landlord chasing a response to her complaint.
  5. The landlord provided it stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 12 December 2022.  It stated a contractor attended and assessed and measured the floor and submitted a quote. The landlord stated due to the quote being too high in price, it had contacted a new contractor which caused a delay. The landlord apologised for the inconvenience this had caused and explained the contractor would attend on 14 December 2022 to assess the floor.
  6. On 13 December 2022, the resident contacted the landlord and requested her complaint to be escalated to the next stage of the landlord’s complaints process. She stated following the assessment of the floor by the contractor, she had no explanation, updates, or communication from the repairs team. The resident explained the landlord would book an appointment for the contractor to attend without notifying her, or the contractor would not turn up for the appointment. She also stated that the flooring issue had been outstanding for 2 months and was a safety hazard.
  7. On 15 December 2022, the landlord contacted the resident and apologised that there had been 3 missed appointments by its flooring contractor. It also offered the resident £60 in gift vouchers to recognise the inconvenience caused.
  8. On 19 December 2022, the landlord emailed the resident and offered her £100 compensation to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by the delay in completing the flooring repairs.
  9. The landlord contacted the resident on 20 December 2022 and stated it was increasing its offer of gift vouchers to £80, as there was a further missed appointment. In addition, the landlord also confirmed it was increasing its compensation offer from £100 to £120.
  10. On 16 January 2023, the landlord emailed the resident with an increased offer of compensation from £120 to £150 to recognise the delay in the flooring repair remaining outstanding.
  11. On 20 January 2023, the resident contacted the landlord and asked again for her complaint to be escalated to the next stage of the landlord’s complaints process.
  12. On 30 May 2023, the contacted the landlord stating she was still waiting to receive her stage 2 complaint response.
  13. The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 22 August 2023. It explained that the repairs to the resident’s floor had been completed. The landlord confirmed it had previously offered the resident £230 compensation, which included £80 in gift vouchers. However, it stated after taking into consideration the delays, it had a new amended offer. The landlord offered £175 to recognise its complaint handling delays, and £220 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the delays in repairing the floor. The landlord confirmed the offer was in addition to the £80 gift vouchers it had already issued.
  14. On 31 August 2023, the resident contacted the landlord and reported issues with the installation of the flooring.
  15. On 4 October 2023, the landlord’s contractor attended the resident’s property and replaced part of the laminate flooring. In addition, the landlord emailed the resident and confirmed it had reviewed the compensation it offered her due to the additional delays with the flooring issues. The landlord offered the resident a total of £940, which included:
    1. £100 for complaint handling delays.
    2. £120 for additional missed appointments.
    3. £720 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by the delays in repairing the floor.
  16. The landlord deducted £230 it previously offered in January 2023 from the above offer as it had already issued the cheque and gift vouchers. Therefore, it confirmed it would process a cheque for £710.
  17. On 18 October 2023, the landlord amended the offer amount to take into consideration out-of-pocket expenses. It offered the resident an additional £103.73 for the resident’s food expenses. In addition, it offered the resident £160 to recognise its delay in escalating the complaint to stage 2 of its process. The landlord confirmed it would issue a cheque for the additional £263.73.
  18. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and submitted her complaint to the Ombudsman. She stated that her desired outcome was to receive further compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s delays.

Assessment and findings

Repairs to the resident’s damaged floor.

  1. The landlord’s repairs policy states the landlord is responsible repairs to kitchen and bathroom floor coverings.
  2. The landlord’s repairs policy also includes information on the landlord’s repair timescales. It states that the landlord will respond to an emergency repair within 24 hours, and it will complete a routine day-to-day repair at the earliest mutually convenient appointment. As the landlord’s repairs policy from the time did not include a timescale for routine repairs, the Ombudsman have taken into consideration good practice timescales, which is normally 28 days for routine repairs.
  3. The landlord’s compensation policy states if it fails to carry out an appointment and does not provide at least 24 hours’ notice, it will award a resident £20 for the missed appointment. The policy states for small amounts awarded for missed appointments, it would usually issue a gift voucher.
  4. In addition, the landlord’s compensation policy explains it will reimburse any relevant out-of-pocket expenses incurred by a resident due to its own service failure.
  5. In October 2022, the landlord’s contractor attended the resident’s property to fix a boiler leak. Shortly after, the resident contacted the landlord and reported the laminate flooring in her kitchen had been damaged by a leak from her boiler.
  6. The landlord responded appropriately to the report and arranged for its contractor to assess the damage to the floor. The landlord’s contractor attended the resident’s property at the start of November 2022 to assess the floor. The contractors’ note stated that the flooring was damaged and peeling and required replacing.
  7. Following the inspection, there were delays in the contractor returning to the resident’s property to carry out the works to replace the damaged flooring. The landlord had booked appointments for its contractor to attend the resident’s property in November and December 2022. However, the contractor failed to turn up to any of the appointments and the resident contacted the landlord informing it of the missed appointments. The multiple missed appointments by the landlord’s contractor were unreasonable and would have inconvenienced the resident.
  8. Due to the flooring repairs remaining outstanding, the resident submitted a complaint to the landlord explaining that the contractor had missed appointments, and she had tried to contact the contractor on several occasions. In response to the resident’s concerns, the landlord apologised for the inconvenience caused. It also explained it had hired a new contractor, as the previous contractor’s quote was too high. The landlord confirmed the contractor would be attending on 14 December 2022. It’s positive that the landlord apologised for the delay. However, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to update the resident about the change in contractor sooner than it did.
  9. The landlord’s contractor failed to turn up for the appointment booked for 14 December 2022 and the resident notified the landlord of this. On 15 December 2022, the landlord apologised for the multiple missed appointments and offered the resident £60 gift vouchers for the missed appointments. The gift vouchers the landlord offered were in line with the landlord’s compensation policy and this was an appropriate offer for the delays up to that point.

 

  1. Shortly after, on 19 December 2022, the contractor attended the resident’s property and assessed the flooring. The quote from the contractor was approved on the same day and an appointment was booked for 28 December 2022 to install the flooring. The landlord also offered the resident £100 compensation to recognise the delays in completing the repairs to the floor. However, shortly after, it increased the offer from £100 to £120 compensation and also increased the gift vouchers from £60 to £80 to recognise a further missed appointment. The landlord took reasonable steps by approving the quote for flooring quickly, and it was appropriate for it to offer compensation for the delay.
  2. The landlord’s contractor failed to attend the booked appointment for 28 December 2022. This was unreasonable, and we recognise this would have been frustrating for the resident. In response to the missed appointment, the landlord contacted the resident in January 2023 and increased its offer of compensation from £120 to £150 and also confirmed a new appointment had been booked in for January 2023. The landlord acted appropriately by increasing the compensation offer to recognise the further delay.
  3. On 30 January 2023, the resident contacted the landlord and stated she was unhappy with the repairs to the floor completed so far by the contractor. She stated that some of the floor was already coming away. The landlord took reasonable steps by stating it would ask its contractor to address the issue with the floor. Following this, there were considerable delays in the floor works being completed. The landlord’s contractor missed appointments during February, March, and April 2023. Due to the number of missed appointments and issues raised about the contractor’s standard of work, the Ombudsman would have expected the landlord to consider using an alternative contractor, if possible, to carry out the flooring repairs.
  4. The Ombudsman recognises the landlord’s contractor missing multiple booked appointments was unreasonable and would have contributed to the delay in the completion of the flooring repairs at the resident’s property. In addition, there was no prior notice given to the resident regarding the missed appointments, which would have resulted in the resident waiting for the contractor who didn’t turn up to the appointments.
  5. At the end of May 2023, the landlord’s contractor attended the resident’s property and applied a coat of varnish on the floor. Due to this, the resident contacted the landlord and explained she could not use the kitchen as she needed to let the floor dry. Therefore, she confirmed she would need to order food to eat and confirmed she would keep the receipts, so the landlord could reimburse her for the food. However, the landlord’s staff member informed the resident that it did not reimburse for meals. The landlord’s response was unreasonable, and the Ombudsman would have expected to consider the resident’s reimbursement request in line with its compensation policy, which confirms it reimburses for out-of-pocket expenses. Because of this initial failing, it is recommended that the landlord carry out staff training to ensure its staff are familiar with its own compensation policy, particularly regarding out-of-pocket expenses.
  6. In June 2023, the landlord contacted the resident and confirmed it would use a new flooring contractor to complete the works to her kitchen floor. The landlord acted appropriately by using a new contractor. However, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to change contractor much earlier than it did due to multiple missed appointments and the issue with the standard of works.
  7. The landlord confirmed in its stage 2 response that it would offer the resident £220 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the delays in repairing the floor. Whilst it is positive that the landlord increased its offer, the amount of compensation offered was not sufficient to recognise all the missed appointments by the landlord’s contractor. In addition, it also did not take into consideration the resident’s request for the reimbursement of the meals she had to purchase when she could not use the kitchen.
  8. Shortly after the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response, the resident contacted the landlord at the end of August 2023 and explained there were issues with the floor and stated the floor was bubbling. The landlord’s contractor attended the resident’s property at the start of October 2023 and resolved the issues with the floor. Due to there being further issues with the floor, in October 2023, the landlord reviewed the compensation amount it previously offered to the resident. The landlord’s final offer of compensation, which was made on 18 October 2023, included:
    1. £260 for complaint handling delays.
    2. £120 for additional missed appointments.
    3. £720 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by the delays in repairing the floor.
    4. £103.73 for food expenses.

The total amount of compensation offered was £1203.73. However, the landlord confirmed it deducted the £230 it previously offered in January 2023 from the above offer, as it had already issued the cheque and gift vouchers. Therefore, it confirmed it would process a cheque for £973.73.

  1. It is positive that the landlord amended its offer to take into consideration the additional missed appointments and the resident’s food expenses. The Ombudsman recognises that the additional offer made by the landlord in October 2023 was after the resident had exhausted the landlord’s complaints process. However, we have taken into consideration that there were further issues with the resident’s floor after it issued the stage 2 response, which resulted in the landlord reviewing the compensation amount after its internal complaints process had ended. The compensation offered to the resident complies 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 £1000 or more where there have been serious failings by the landlord, which had a significant long-term impact on the resident. The compensation proportionately reflects the impact of the delay and distress and inconvenience on the resident, and it amounts to reasonable redress in this case.

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 10 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 referenced in the Code.
  2. The Code also states that a landlord must accept a complaint unless there is a valid reason not to do so. In addition, it explains when a complaint is made, it must be acknowledged and logged at stage 1 of the landlord’s complaint procedure within 5 days of receipt. The landlord’s complaints policy references the same complaint acknowledgment timescale as the Code.
  3. On 21 November 2022, the resident submitted her initial complaint to the landlord. However, the landlord failed to log the resident’s complaint email as a complaint. The landlord eventually logged a complaint for the resident after she emailed the landlord on 7 December 2022, chasing a response to her email she previously sent in November 2022. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 12 December 2022, which was shortly after the resident’s chaser email. However, its failure to log the resident’s initial complaint email was unreasonable and not compliant with the Code.
  4. On 12 December 2022, the resident requested her complaint to be escalated to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaint process. There was a significant delay in the landlord providing its stage 2 complaint response to the resident. Due to this, the resident contacted the landlord several times asking for an update on her final response. The landlord eventually provided its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 22 August 2023, which was approximately 7 months late. The response was significantly late and not compliant with the timescales referenced in the Code or the landlord’s own complaint’s policy. The late stage 2 complaint response would have caused inconvenience for the resident, as she was delayed in progressing her complaint to the Ombudsman because she needed to wait for the landlord’s final response before contacting our service.
  5. The landlord acknowledged that there were delays and errors in its complaint handling. The landlord offered £175 compensation in its stage 2 complaint response to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by the complaint handling errors. However, shortly after it issued its stage 2 complaint response, it reviewed its compensation offer in October 2023 and increased its offer for complaint handling to £260. The compensation amount offered to the resident was reasonable and complies with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance referenced above. The compensation proportionately reflects the impact of the delay on the resident, and it amounts to reasonable redress for this aspect of the complaint.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53 (b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation, which in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves the resident’s concerns about:
    1. Repairs to the resident’s damaged floor.
    2. the landlord’s complaint handling.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord pay the resident its original offer of £1203.73 compensation, which included £80 gift vouchers offered during its complaint process if it has not already done so. The Ombudsman’s finding of reasonable redress is based on the understanding that this compensation will be paid.
  2. It is recommended that the landlord carry out staff training to ensure its appropriate staff are familiar with its compensation policy, particularly regarding out-of-pocket expenses.