London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202324885)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202324885

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

13 June 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
1. the resident’s reports of repairs to the window frames.
2. the complaint.

Background

The resident is a shared owner of the property with the landlord, under a lease dated 2001. The property is a 1 bedroom, ground floor apartment. The landlord is a housing association.
In December 2022 the resident raised a repair request to the landlord. She reported that the wooden sash window frames at her property were rotten and cracked. Sometime between December 2022 and 11 January 2023 the landlord inspected the property.
On 13 April 2023 the resident told the landlord she wanted to raise a complaint about the rotten windows. She said:
1. she requested the repair because the cyclical maintenance plan should cover this type of work. Despite the fact she contributes to the sink fund, it seemed to have fallen “by the wayside”.
2. she had reported the repair in December 2022, someone had inspected and since then the landlord had not contacted her.
3. she had chased customer services who advised her that a quote was awaiting authorisation and that it would contact her within 10 days. No-one had contacted her despite this, and the cycle had repeated for months.
4. the windows continued to deteriorate. The longer they were left, the more costly fixing them would become.
5. she would like the landlord to provide her with a date for when it would complete the repairs
The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response the same day. It said:
1. it upheld her complaint and apologised for her time and trouble in having to chase the repair.
2. it could see that she had been chasing the landlord since December 2022.
3. the reason for the delay was that there was a quote from the contractors which was pending approval. It had chased this and would confirm with the resident once it had been progressed.
4. it valued her feedback as it provides it with an opportunity to look at areas of improvement.
The resident contacted the landlord again in June 2023 and July 2023. She said she was unhappy with the service and wanted clarity on repair completion timeline. In July 2023 the landlord told her that the planned works team would complete the repairs. It did not give her a date for completion but told her the team would be in touch.
In November 2023 the resident requested dates for the repair and to escalate the complaint. On 13 November 2023 she said:
1. the job was raised on 9 December 2022 and it remained outstanding.
2. winter was approaching and the windows were an essential part of staying insulated. She was worried about her health and wellbeing. The property was affected by wood rot and cold temperatures.
3. her finances were being affected as she was having to heat her property against the elements.
4. the windows were barely staying in their frames which was a safety concern. She was worried about the security of the property.
5. should the poor quality of the windows impact the security of her belongings, her insurance company could invalidate her policy as the conditions may be breaching their expectations of a secure building.
6. she wanted help getting her request progressed by the appropriate person.
The landlord acknowledged the escalation request on 13 November 2024. On 8 January 2024 this Service asked the landlord to issue its stage 2 response by 15 January 2024.
The landlord issued the stage 2 response on 15 January 2024. It said:
1. regarding the window repairs:
  1. the landlord had told the resident in July 2023 that the repairs were now with the planned works team. It could not provide a date for when works would begin.
  2. the planned works team had since said that they would need to inspect the windows and raise follow-on works after the inspection. The team would be in touch to arrange an appointment.
  3. in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused, it offered the resident £320 compensation.
2. regarding the poor communication:
  1. the resident complained in April 2023 and the landlord responded on the same date.
  2. the resident escalated the complaint, and the landlord acknowledged it during a phone call on 9 January 2024.
  3. the landlord could see that the level of communication and complaint handling could have been better.
  4. in recognition of complaint handling failures, it offered the resident £240 compensation.
The resident contacted told this Service that the works remain outstanding, and the windows continue to deteriorate. She said that she had not heard from the landlord since the stage 2 complaint response. She said that the building is grade 2 listed. She would like the landlord to repair the rotten window frames.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of repairs to her window frames

The resident’s leasehold agreement requires the landlord to keep the exterior and structure of the resident’s property, including all load-bearing walls and windows, in repair.
The landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy confirms it is responsible for maintaining the exterior and structure of the property. For homeowners, this includes the external frames of the windows. The repairs policy states that where age and wear and tear affect key components such as kitchens, bathroom, doors and windows, these will be replaced through a planned programme of work.
The landlord has a responsibility under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS), introduced by the Housing Act 2004, to assess hazards and risks within its rented properties. Rotten and defective windows can give rise to the following hazards:
1. damp and mould growth.
2. excess cold.
3. falls between levels.
4. falling elements.
The landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy states that it aims to attend and make safe an emergency repair within 24 hours and complete routine day-to–day repairs within an average of 25 calendar days.
The Ombudsman’s spotlight report on repairs, published in 2019, recommends that where complex or extensive work is required, landlords should acknowledge that there are outstanding repairs, explain what action it will take and provide timescales, even if these are provisional. Where there is a delay in completing repairs, it is reasonable for landlords to be proactive in:
1. communicating the cause of delays to residents.
2. explaining to residents what it intends to do about the delays.
3. identifying what it can do to mitigate the impact of delays on residents.
On 9 December 2022 the resident contacted the landlord to raise concerns about her rotten and cracked window frames. The landlord responded to the resident on the same day acknowledging her request. It raised an inspection of the windows with its contractor. This was a reasonable and timely response.
The inspection job raised on 9 December 2022 was cancelled and re-raised on 16 December 2022 for reasons that have not been made clear to this Service. The inspection took place sometime before 11 January 2023 as the contractor submitted a quote on this date.
That an inspection was undertaken was positive. However, there is no record of a post inspection summary which details the specific works required within the landlord’s records. The poor record keeping in this case has limited this Service’s ability to determine whether the landlord’s actions were fair and reasonable in the circumstances, which was a failing.
The resident telephoned the landlord to request an update on 15 March 2023 and 21 March 2023. The landlord’s internal communication records show the contractor had submitted a quote for the window repair on 11 January 2023. The quote was for over £4,000 which meant it required senior approval. It did not update the resident about the delay or the reason for it, which was a failing.
On 13 April 2023 the resident raised a complaint. She wanted a date for the repair completion. The landlord upheld the complaint and explained a quote was pending approval. In an attempt to put things right, the landlord said it had chased the quote approval and would update the resident once this had been progressed. It took over 4 months from the date of the repair request for the landlord to explain the reason for the delay to the resident. This was outside the timescales set in the repairs and maintenance policy. This was inappropriate.
Additionally, given the length of time that had already passed, it would have been fairer to the resident for the landlord to have provided her with a date that it would update her by. This would have managed her expectations and may have increased trust between the resident and landlord.
The resident chased the landlord on 26 April 2023, she said it had been 2 weeks since the complaint response, and she had not been contacted. On 5 June 2023 the resident requested a plan of action and confirmation the landlord would complete the repairs within a reasonable timeframe. This was acknowledged internally, but the landlord did not respond to the resident, which was a failing.
In May 2023 the records show that the contractor had recommended the replacement of 8 new double-glazed windows. On 20 June 2023 the records show a note reading “works to be carried out by planned works.” It did not communicate this decision to the resident, which was a failing.
On 26 July 2023 the resident contacted the landlord again requesting a date for when it would ensure the windows were fit for purpose, weatherproofed and secure. On 27 July 2023 the landlord responded. It said it had put the works on a planned maintenance list. It said it could not provide a date for completion but that the relevant team would contact her as soon as possible.
That the resident had to chase the landlord to establish its change of position on the repair was a failing when assessed against the repairs policy and falls short of the good practice guidance outlined in our spotlight report. It led to the resident having her expectations raised and lowered, which has caused ongoing distress and frustration. Additionally, the landlord continued to refuse to provide the resident with an estimated date for repair completion, which was a failing.
On 13 November 2023 the resident escalated her complaint. She expressed concerns about the financial and practical difficulty of keeping the property warm. She said she was worried about her safety and the security of her belongings due to the condition of the windows and her being in a ground floor property.
On 15 January 2024 the landlord’s communication records show that the planned works team did not have a record of the window repair. To progress this, paperwork would need to be submitted to the planned works team and another inspection would need to take place to see if the windows were eligible for replacement or renewal. It is essential that landlords keep accurate and clear repair records so that they can monitor repairs effectively and ensure they fulfil their responsibilities. The lack of clear records in this case would have made it more difficult for the landlord to monitor the repairs at the resident’s property and may have contributed to the delays.
In the stage 2 complaint response, the landlord told the resident the planned works team would be in touch to inspect the windows. It said works would be raised following the inspection. It apologised for its poor communication and, to put things right, it offered the resident £320 compensation broken into £80 for her time and effort getting the complaint resolved and £240 for distress and inconvenience.
It is reasonable for landlords to schedule major works such as replacing multiple windows in a property to manage their budgets. However, it is not reasonable to leave windows frames in an advanced state of disrepair in the interim period. The resident expressed concerns for her safety and the risk of excess cold in her property in April 2023.
The landlord failed to undertake repairs to the window frames to remove the immediate hazards they presented. It did not consider its duties under the Housing Act 2004. Not conducting the required make safe repairs was a failure to comply with its own policies, the resident’s leasehold agreement and its legislative obligations.
The resident told this Service in 2025 that:
1. the landlord had not contacted her about the windows since the stage 2 complaint response was issued over a year ago.
2. the outside of the windows and the window ledges have continued to deteriorate, and the rot has spread internally.
3. she would have been happy for the landlord to consider repairing the windows rather than replacing them.
4. having to chase the repair has been highly stressful. The entire process has been protracted and, at times, felt like a “full time job”.
Overall, we have found severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of repairs to the window frames because:
1. it has been over 30 months since the resident reported the repair, and landlord has not undertaken any repair work to the windows.
2. the landlord failed to keep the resident updated on its decisions in respect of the repair, which led to her having to spend time and effort chasing it.
3. the landlord continues to fail to issue the resident either with a timeframe for repair completion or an appointment for a new inspection required for the planned works team to progress the repair.
4. the landlord’s communication between teams and record keeping were poor, and this led to confusion and delays in progressing the repair.
The landlord repeatedly failed to provide the same service which had a seriously detrimental impact on the resident. This demonstrated a failure to provide a service, put things right and learn from outcomes.
In accordance with our remedies guidance, we have ordered the landlord to pay the resident £1,000 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the failings identified. The landlord can deduct the £320 already offered to the resident if it can evidence it has already paid this.
The landlord is also ordered to inspect the property and issue the resident with an action plan to address the window frame repairs. If the landlord has to apply to the local planning authority for works to be completed, this must be included in the action plan and communicated to the resident. The landlord must provide timescales for the actions agreed.

The landlord’s handling of the complaint

The landlord’s complaints policy states it will respond at stage 1 of its complaints process within 10 working days and at stage 2 within 20 working days. These timescales are compliant with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code). It states that if the complainant is dissatisfied with the stage 1 decision, it will escalate the complaint to Stage 2. It says it would need to know why the resident is dissatisfied and what will resolve the complaint. Where possible, it says it will try to reach a resolution without the need for escalation, otherwise the complaint will be escalated without delay.
The resident raised her complaint on 13 April 2023. The landlord telephoned the resident to discuss the complaint, chased the relevant internal teams and issued its stage 1 complaint response on the same day. This was reasonable and in keeping with the timescales outlined in its complaints policy.
On 26 April 2023 the resident asked the landlord for an update. It did not respond, which was unreasonable.
On 5 June 2023 the resident contacted the landlord again. She said unless a plan of action was produced by the landlord she would have to escalate the complaint. The landlord did not respond to the resident’s communication, neither to discuss a repair plan or confirm whether she wanted to escalate her complaint. This was unreasonable and led to a delay in her complaint being addressed, which was not compliant with the complaints policy.
On 26 July 2023 the resident contacted the landlord. She reiterated her frustration, she said nothing had been done and she requested dates for the commencement of maintenance. In line with the approach set out in the Code, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have progressed the complaint to stage 2 at this point, based on the resident’s expression of her dissatisfaction with its handling of the matter.
On 1 November 2023 the resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint to stage 2. On 8 November 2023 the landlord replied that there was a backlog of stage 2 complaints, and it would be unable to advise when she would be allocated an officer. It said if she still wanted to proceed, she would need the resident to confirm the reasons in writing. The landlord tried to discourage the resident from progressing her complaint to stage 2. This approach was inappropriate and evidence that the landlord operated an obstructive complaint process.
On 13 November 2023 the resident confirmed that she wanted to escalate her complaint. She raised concerns about her safety and the security of her belongings because of the window disrepair. The landlord responded on the same day advising her that it had escalated her complaint, but it could not say when she would be issued with a response. This was inappropriate and inconsistent with its own policy and the Code.
The resident contacted this Service to request support with her complaint in December 2023. On 8 January 2024, in response, we asked the landlord to provide a final response to the resident by 15 January 2024. It took the landlord 224 working days to issue its stage 2 complaint response from the date of the resident’s initial expression of dissatisfaction following the stage 1 complaint response. This was a significant delay when assessed against the landlord’s complaints policy, which was inappropriate.
In the stage 2 complaint response, the landlord apologised and offered the resident £240 in compensation for delays at stage 2 and poor complaint handling. This was a reasonable attempt by the landlord to put things right for the resident.
Overall, we have found service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling. The compensation offered was not quite proportionate to the distress and inconvenience caused by its obstructive complaint handling at stage 2. Had the landlord not acknowledged its failings in the stage 2 response, we would have found a high level of maladministration in this case.
In the time since this complaint exhausted the internal complaints procedure, the landlord has been ordered to review its overall complaint handling by this Service. In recognition of this work, we have not ordered the landlord to undertake any further complaint handling training. However, we have recommended that the parties involved in the complaint handling read this report and consider improvements that could be made to prevent similar obstructions happening in future.
The landlord is ordered to apologise to the resident for failing to escalate the complaint without delay. It is also ordered to pay the resident a further £60 in recognition of the distress caused by the failures identified, taking the total compensation for complaint handling to £300. The landlord can deduct the £240 if it has already paid this to the resident, if it can provide evidence of this payment.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was severe maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of repairs to her window frames.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within 28 days of the date of this determination, the landlord is ordered to:
1. provide a written apology to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The Chief Executive must make the apology.
2. write to the resident setting out what the landlord has learnt from the failures identified in the report and what actions it will take to prevent the same failures from happening again in the future.
3. pay the resident compensation of £1,300 in replacement of the offer made during the complaint procedure. This is comprised of:
  1. £1,000 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the resident’s reports of repairs to the window frames.
  2. £300 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the complaint.
4. the landlord must pay the compensation directly to the resident. The landlord can reduce the total compensation by the £560 already offered in the complaints procedure if it can evidence that it has already paid this.
5. contact the resident to arrange and undertake an inspection of the property to identify an action plan for outstanding repairs to the windows.
Within 14 days of the inspection, the landlord must provide a written report to the Ombudsman and the resident which must set out a schedule of works, together with indicative timescales to complete any repairs that are found to be outstanding. If the landlord has to apply to the local planning authority for works to be completed, it must include this in the action plan and communicate it to the resident.
The landlord must provide evidence of compliance with the above orders within the timescales set out above.

Recommendations

We recommend that the parties involved in the resident’s complaint handling are provided with a copy of this report to review the failings with the aim of reducing the likelihood of similar obstructions happening in the future.