Read our damp and mould report focusing on Awaab's Law

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) (202339089)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202339089

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

8 May 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 the resident’s reports of a loss of heating and hot water.
  2. We have also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident was a tenant of the landlord at the time of her complaint. The resident reported to the landlord she was vulnerable due to a disability. Since the resident’s complaint the landlord has transferred the resident’s property to a different landlord.
  2. On 10 November 2023, the resident reported a total loss of heating and hot water. The information available indicates the repair did not go ahead at that time.
  3. The resident made a complaint on 4 December 2023. She said she was unhappy because nobody had been out to fix the heating, and hot water and her property was “very cold”. The resident raised concerns the landlord was not having due consideration for her disability by leaving her without heating and hot water.
  4. The landlord’s records reflect its contractor completed a repair on 7 December 2023.
  5. The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response on 22 December 2023. It apologised the resident had to complaint to get the repair done. It offered her £334 in compensation for its handling of the repair.
  6. Following its stage 1 complaint response the resident contacted the landlord and said she was unhappy with the offer of compensation made in its complaint response. She said in a phone call she had raised concerns it should also compensate her for her increased bills while the hot water was not working (due to having to use the emersion heater). She claimed the landlord had agreed to make an increased offer of compensation. It does not appear the landlord responded at the time.
  7. Following an intervention from this Service, the landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response on 27 March 2024, and said:
    1. There were multiple missed appointments by its contractors which led to her being without heating and hot water for a “long period”.
    2. It apologised it had “let [her] down” in its handling of the repairs.
    3. It apologised she had not received the “full amount of compensation promised”.
    4. It offered a further £146 in compensation, broken down as follows:
      1. £36 for the “outstanding compensation”.
      2. £50 for distress.
      3. £60 for the delayed stage 2 complaint response.
  8. The resident contacted the landlord us on 9 April 2024 and asked us to investigate her complaint, and said:
    1. She was unhappy with the landlord’s response.
    2. The landlord told her she would receive additional compensation to cover her increased energy costs while the heating and hot water system was broken.
    3. She was unhappy the landlord did not cover this concern in its stage 2 complaint response.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a loss of heating and hot water

  1. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 obliges the landlord to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the property, and keep in repair and proper working order the installations for the supply of water and sanitation.
  2. The landlord’s repair policy states it aims to attend to emergency repairs within 24 hours and routine repairs within and average of 25 days.
  3. The evidence shows the resident reported the repair to the landlord on 10 November 2023 and there is no evidence the repair went ahead at the time. This was unreasonable. The resident was evidently distressed at the lack of heating and hot water. The lack of proactive action on the part of the landlord may have increased the distress the resident experienced. It is particularly concerning the repair did not go ahead as an emergency repair given the resident raised concerns about her vulnerability when reporting the repair.
  4. The evidence shows when the resident made a complaint the landlord sought to urgently attend to the repair. The resident was inconvenienced by the need to raise a complaint in order for the landlord to take action on the repair. This was unreasonable. We acknowledge after the resident raised her complaint, the landlord sought to urgently progress with the repair. This is evidence it took her concerns seriously and considered her concerns about her reported vulnerability.
  5. After the resident complained, the information we have available indicates the landlord’s contractor failed to attend on 2 occasions. This was evidently frustrating for the resident and may have increased the distress she experienced. The resident was inconvenienced by the need to chase the landlord about the repairs visits on 5 December 2023.
  6. The landlord has not provided detailed records about the repairs visits. This is a failing in its record keeping. We have seen an internal email for the landlord that says the repair was completed on 7 December 2023. However, we have also seen evidence the resident said in an email on 21 December 2023 that it did not complete the repair until 12 December 2023. The landlord did not dispute this claim in its later response. It is therefore reasonable to conclude the resident’s claim was accurate. This was an unreasonable delay in completing an urgent repair.
  7. The landlord offered £334 in its stage 1 complaint response, and apologised for its handling of the repairs. This is evidence it sought to put things right for the resident. However, its response lacked learning about what had caused the delay and what it would do to prevent similar delays in the future. This was a shortcoming in its response and it missed an opportunity to show learning and build trust with the resident. It also did not address the resident’s concerns about her vulnerability and the increased impact on her because of this. This was inappropriate and a shortcoming in its response.
  8. The resident contacted the landlord on receipt of its complaint response and said she was unhappy it had not addressed her concern about increased energy costs, and offered to supply evidence. We have seen evidence she contacted it about this issue on 3 occasions in December 2023 and January 2024 before receiving a response. It responded on 21 January 2024 and said it would “chase up” the additional compensation. It does not appear it followed up on this with the resident. This was a failing in its communication that inconvenienced the resident.
  9. The resident was further inconvenienced by the fact she had to chase it about the additional compensation again in February 2024. Again, it did not respond which was unreasonable and a further failing in its handling of the matter.
  10. The landlord used its stage 2 complaint response to apologise, give an explanation about the delayed repairs, and make and increased offer of compensation. However, it showed little learning about what it would do to prevent similar delays in the future, and did not address the resident’s concerns she had raised about her disability. This was a shortcoming in its response. It missed an opportunity to build trust with the resident. We recommend the landlord reminds its complaint handling staff of the importance of addressing a resident’s concerns about vulnerabilities in future complaint responses. This is to ensure the full impact on a resident is considered when responding to a complaint.
  11. The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response also failed to address the resident’s concerns about increased heating costs. This was a failing in its response and she was inconvenienced by its lack of response to a specific concern she had raised. The resident may wish to provide the landlord with her energy bill from the time she was without heating and hot water if she has not already done so. We recommend the landlord refunds the resident for her increased costs if she provides the appropriate evidence.
  12. The landlord offered a total of £420 in compensation for its handling of the heating and hot water repairs. Considering the failings identified above we have determined there was service failure in its handling of the matter.
  13. Our remedies guidance sets out an order of compensation between £100 and £600 may be appropriate to put things right for the resident where they have been distressed and/or inconvenienced by the landlord’s errors. Considering the landlord’s total offer of compensation we have not made orders for further compensation. However, we recommend it provides the resident with a refund for increased energy costs if she provides it with the appropriate evidence.

The landlord’s complaint handling

  1. The landlord operates a 2 stage complaints procedure. The timeframes in its procedure mirror that of our Complaint Handling Code (the Code), which sets out our Service’s expectations of a landlord’s complaint handling practices. The Code states landlord must send stage 1 complaint within 10 working days, and stage 2 complaint responses within 20 working days.
  2. The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response within the timeframes set out in its complaints policy and the Code. This was appropriate.
  3. The evidence shows the resident was unhappy with the landlord’s stage 1 response and expressed her dissatisfaction in emails in December 2023, January and February 2024. It is noted the resident did not explicitly ask it to escalate her complaint. However, it was unreasonable the landlord did not open a stage 2 complaint at that time. This was a failing in its complaint handling.
  4. The Code states “if all or part of the complaint is not resolved to the resident’s satisfaction at stage 1, it must be progressed to stage 2”. That it did not do so is evidence it operated an obstructive complaints process. The resident was inconvenienced by the need to seek assistance from us, in March 2024, in order to get a response to her complaint.
  5. The landlord appropriately apologised and offered compensation for errors in its complaint handling. This was appropriate and evidence it sought to put things right for the resident. It was as shortcoming in its response it did not explain what it would do to prevent similar delays occurring in the future. It missed an opportunity to show learning and build trust with the resident.
  6. The landlord offered £60 for the errors in its complaint handling. Our remedies guidance says that orders for up to £100 are appropriate to put right failings that occur over short duration. We consider the landlord’s offer of compensation appropriate to put right errors in its complaint handling.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a loss of heating and hot water.
  2. In accordance with 53.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme the landlord made an offer of redress, which in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolved errors in its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Apologise to the resident in writing for the failings identified in this report. The apology should be in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on apologies, available on our website.
    2. Pay the resident the £420 in compensation it offered in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by errors in its handling of the resident’s reports of a loss of heating and hot water. (If it has not already done so).

Recommendations

We recommend the landlord:

  1. Pays the resident the £60 in compensation it offered for errors in its complaint handling.
  1. Refunds the resident for increased energy costs (covering the period the repair was outstanding) if she provides it with the appropriate evidence.
  2. Reminds its complaint handling staff of the importance of addressing a resident’s concerns about vulnerabilities in future complaint responses. This is to ensure the full impact on a resident is considered when responding to a complaint.