Applications are open to join the next Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel – find out more Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel.

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) (202003616)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202003616

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

28 January 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 handling of repairs to the resident’s windows.

Background

  1. The resident holds an assured tenancy with the landlord, a housing association. She lives in a 3-bedroom house with her husband and 3 children. The landlord has recorded that the resident’s husband is a vulnerable person due to a medical condition.
  2. The resident first reported concerns with her windows in 2019. After a report made in 2022 the resident raised a formal complaint on 31 January 2023. The resident was concerned that:
    1. After an inspection on 9 November 2022 the resolution offered was to replace the window handles, but this had already been tried 2 or 3 previous times without success.
    2. The landlord was ignoring her husband’s medical condition which was impacted by adverse weather conditions. The failure to repair or replace the windows was making this condition worse.
    3. She was having to keep the property’s heating on all day to keep the house warm and this was increasing energy costs.
    4. The landlord was more concerned with money saving than trying to find a permanent resolution to the problems raised.
  3. The landlord responded at stage 1 on 2 February 2023. It advised that the complaint was upheld and apologised for any delays caused. It advised that the most recent window repair was reported on 14 October 2022 and was attended to on 8 December 2022. The job was marked as complete, but as this was an ongoing issue a new inspection was booked for 8 March 2023.
  4. On 28 March 2023 the resident escalated her complaint as she was not satisfied with the outcome of the inspection. This was because the inspection did not consider her husband’s medical condition, and the resolution offered was to replace the window handles. She explained that the previous attempts to change the handles had not resolved the draft coming from the windows and had caused the frame to split. She expressed her disappointment that the landlord had not offered any permanent resolution.
  5. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 17 August 2023. It apologised for any delays and confirmed that a supervisor would be attending the resident’s home to review the windows. The landlord offered £100 for the late stage 2 response and £100 for any distress and inconvenience this had caused. A further inspection was carried out on 12 September 2023 and a referral was made to the landlord’s major works team to replace all windows in the property. A review of the stage 2 complaint response was given by the landlord on 5 October 2023 as the resident remained unhappy with the landlord’s actions. The landlord increased the offer of compensation by £25 to account for an error in the stage 2 response.
  6. The resident remained unhappy and referred her complaint to this Service on 23 October 2023. As a resolution the resident asked that the landlord apologise, compensate her for the failings, and replace her windows. Since this referral the landlord has replaced the resident’s windows following an appointment in October 2024.

Assessment and findings

Scope

  1. It is noted that the resident has raised concerns about her windows dating back to 2019. However, this investigation has primarily focussed on the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports from October 2022 onwards that were dealt with in the most recent formal complaint. This is because the resident would be expected to raise a complaint with their landlord in a timely manner so that the landlord has an opportunity to consider the issues while they are still ‘live’.
  2. The Ombudsman also understands that the resident has raised concerns that the landlord’s actions may have impacted her husband’s health. While this Service is an alternative to the courts, it is unable to establish legal liability or determine if the landlord’s actions or inaction has had a detrimental impact on a person’s health. These matters are likely better dealt with by a court or via a personal injury claim. However, the Ombudsman will consider if the landlord responded to and considered any vulnerabilities within the resident’s household when handling the residents repair reports and complaint.

Repair to windows

  1. The resident raised her most recent report of concerns with her windows on 19 October 2022 where she reported that the wooden windows and frames were starting to come away from the walls. An inspection was arranged for 8 November 2022. The decision to arrange an inspection was reasonable and carried out in line with its repairs policy which says that for routine repairs it will attend within 25 calendar days. As the resident had already had several previous inspections between 2019 and 2022 it is understandable that she may have been frustrated at this. However, as the landlord had made previous attempts to rectify the issue it was reasonable for them to organise a new inspection to assess the windows in their current condition.
  2. While the landlord has not provided evidence of an inspection report or notes from the 8 November 2022 appointment date, it is more likely than not that it advised the resident that it would replace the window handles and carried out this repair. This is because following the appointment on 31 January 2023 the resident raised a formal complaint. This complaint highlighted that the same repair had been completed following the 9 November 2022 inspection that had been suggested and completed previously.
  3. The resident was also unhappy that the landlord had not considered her husband’s medical condition. She explained to the landlord that her husband suffered from a condition that causes his body to go into ‘crisis’ and that this results in a hospital admission to manage the pain. She told the landlord that this can happen as a result of weather conditions when it is either very hot or very cold. By failing to carry out a lasting and effective repair to the windows, the resident considered the property made her husband more vulnerable to these adverse reactions.
  4. As the resident had raised concerns about her husband’s medical condition, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to have considered the full circumstances of the household when reaching a decision on how to proceed. This would have enabled the landlord to explain to the resident why a repair, rather than a replacement was suitable in the circumstances. However, there is no evidence that it did this. Additionally, the evidence does not show that the landlord considered the history of the case where the resident, as early as 2019, was reporting issues with her windows due to a rotting frame and drafts. The failure to properly consider the households individual circumstances and the history of the case was unreasonable. This left the resident frustrated and resulted in a formal complaint being raised.
  5. Following the formal complaint the landlord arranged a new inspection with a supervisor at the resident’s convenience. This inspection took place on 8 March 2023. Internal communication between the landlord shows that the supervisor had ordered repairs to the windows which included replacing the window handles again, and that all of the resident’s windows would be replaced by its ‘planned works’ when in the area. It was the landlord’s opinion that the windows were not in a state where a referral for a replacement needed to be completed sooner.
  6. While the Ombudsman does not doubt that the landlord’s opinion was valid, the evidence does not show that the decision was made based on the household’s individual circumstances. There is no mention of the husband’s vulnerabilities in the decision-making process, nor is there an acknowledgement of the previous repairs (including replacing the window handles) that had already taken place and failed to resolve the issue. The decision by the landlord to repeat similar repairs without fully considering the circumstances of the household and the history of the case likely further frustrated the resident.
  7. The resident escalated her complaint on 28 March 2023 and refused the recommended repairs the landlord had offered following the inspection. She advised that she wanted the landlord to consider a permanent resolution to the matter. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s escalation but failed to take any further action in relation to the windows until it issued its stage 2 response on 17 August 2023. This delay of 5 months was unreasonable and continued to add to the resident’s distress and inconvenience.
  8. In its stage 2 response the landlord said that it would send another supervisor to inspect the resident’s property to review her windows. This inspection took place on 12 September 2023 and a referral was made to replace all the resident’s windows. It recorded that although the condition of the windows remained the same, it had taken account of the resident’s concerns that the issue was said to be affecting the health of her husband. The immediate actions following the stage 2 response were reasonable. The landlord assessed the windows again but recognised that there were unique individual circumstances in the resident’s household.
  9. The windows were replaced on 15 October 2024. Based on the evidence available the issue was resolved 2 years after being raised. While the original inspection reports did not recommend a replacement of the windows and doors, once this decision was made, there was a clear delay in carrying out this work.  
  10. The landlord has told the Ombudsman that the reason for this delay was due to the backlog in its complaint handling. There is also a lack of evidence to show that it kept the resident updated on the timescales involved in a replacement. This delay and failure to communicate the timescales involved was unreasonable and caused significant distress and inconvenience to the resident. It also led to the resident losing faith in the landlord’s ability to assist her and consider fully the impact on her vulnerable husband.
  11. This Service recognises that window-related repairs can be complex and different actions may be needed which can lead to different timescales. The Ombudsman also understands that the landlord may receive a request to replace windows outside of planned works when they could reasonably be repaired.
  12. However, this is why it is important for the landlord to show that it has fully considered the households individual circumstances when it makes a decision. There are options available such as conducting a thorough risk assessment based on individual household circumstances which would ensure that decisions are made from a fully informed position. In this case, it is the Ombudsman’s view that the landlord did not appropriately consider the resident’s households individual circumstances. Even after it agreed the windows needed replacement it deferred this work for a further 13 months and has not provided a reasonable explanation or justification for doing so.
  13. Taking all the circumstances into account, and for the reasons given above, the landlord’s actions amount to maladministration. The landlord did offer the resident £200 compensation this was £100 for the delay in its stage 2 complaint handling and £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused. While it is positive the landlord offered compensation for the delay in its complaint handling, there was no compensation offered for the failings related to the window repair.
  14. Based on this Service’s guidance on remedies where there has been a significant impact on the resident a payment of between £600 to £1,000 is appropriate. Therefore, it is ordered that the landlord pay the resident £900 compensation, broken down as:
    1. £700 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the delay.
    2. £200 for the time and trouble in having to raise the same issue repeatedly.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the repairs to the resident’s windows.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Provide a written apology to the resident for the failings identified.
    2. Pay £900 compensation to the resident, broken down as:
      1. £700 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the delay.
      2. £200 for the time and trouble in having to raise the same issue repeatedly.
    3. Review whether it should offer specific training in relation to window related complaints and how these should be dealt with, this review should consider this Service’s centre of learning page on windows and whether any learning can be taken from this. Evidence of its review and considerations should be provided to this Service. (https://www.housing-ombudsman.org.uk/centre-for-learning/key-topics/windows/)

 

 

Chat to us