London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202438710)

A blue and grey text

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202438710

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

30 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:
1. Handling of the resident’s report of damp and mould.
2. Response to the resident’s request to move.
We have also considered the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Background

The resident has an assured tenancy of the property which began in January 2013. The property is a ground floor flat. The landlord is a housing association. The resident has medical conditions including rheumatoid arthritis and lupus. Cold temperatures can affect symptoms in both these conditions. The resident also has a pulmonary embolism which can cause respiratory issues. The landlord is aware the resident has severe medical conditions.
The resident said she first reported damp and mould in her property around 2018. In 2020 the landlord took some steps to resolve the issues. The resident raised the issue again in September 2022 when she reported damp and mould was forming around her windows. The landlord completed an inspection, following which it completed a clean and shield (mould wash) in the resident’s bedroom.
On 22 November 2022 the resident complained to the landlord about how it had handled the reports of damp and mould. She said the landlord’s actions had not been a permanent fix and the damp and mould had returned. She said the surveyor who had inspected the property in September 2022 told her the external walls were not properly insulated, which she believed was why the property was cold and did not retain the heat. She said it had not shared a copy of the inspection report with her or updated her on actions it intended to take, other than to complete a mould wash and trim the flat door to allow air to pass through. She said she had to repeatedly chase the landlord for updates. She said the landlord sent incorrect tradesmen to the property, who turned up unannounced or not knowing what repair they were meant to complete.
In relation to the mould wash which the landlord had completed in September 2022 the surveyor had told the resident the contractor would move the wardrobe to clean behind it. The contractor had refused to do this and had therefore not treated the wall behind the wardrobe. She said the mould had damaged her wardrobe, carpet, and clothing which she had to replace. She said the condition of the property was affecting her physical and mental health. She said she was sleeping in her lounge because the bedroom was too cold and she was scared the mould would affect her health. She asked the landlord to complete a thorough investigation to identify the root cause of the damp and mould and resolve any identified issues within a timely manner. As an alternative, she asked the landlord to move her to another property.
On 6 December 2022 the landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response. It said inadequate ventilation in the bedroom had caused the damp and mould. It said the resident had 2 air vents in her bedroom. One of which was a passive ventilator, which the resident must use to help circulate air throughout the room. It said it was launching a programme in April 2023 to improve the energy efficiency of some of its properties. It agreed to add the resident to its insulation list which it had created to contact residents if the programme became available in April 2023.
On 7 December 2022 the resident informed the landlord that she had not received a response to her complaint. She said the damp and mould issues had been ongoing since she moved into the property. She referred to her medical conditions and explained that the weather had turned colder and she felt she could no longer stay in the property. She asked the landlord to consider moving her to temporary accommodation until it decided what repairs it needed to complete.
On 5 September 2023 the landlord acknowledged the resident’s request to escalate her complaint.
On 9 November 2023 the landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response. It explained that it had a backlog of stage 2 complaint responses which it was working through. The delays had impacted the resident’s complaint. The landlord acknowledged the resident had chased it for updates on the complaint and repairs several times. It acknowledged the frustration and inconvenience caused and the potential distress due to the lack of communication. It acknowledged the damp and mould issues dated back to 2020 and that it should have escalated repairs after lockdown. In relation to the more recent report in 2022, it said it had completed a mould wash to the property, resolved a reported leak in the resident’s kitchen, and logged a repair for the kitchen extractor fan. It had inspected the property on 5 October 2023 and raised the identified repairs. It provided updates on the repairs and confirmed the outstanding repairs would be allocated to the relevant team who would be in touch with the resident in due course. In relation to the resident’s damaged personal items, the landlord outlined that this was outside its complaint process and the resident would need to claim against her home contents insurance. If she did not have insurance cover, it provided the process for her to make a claim against the landlord. It said it was upholding the resident’s complaint and offered £2,070 in compensation, which it broke down as follows:
1. £720 – distress caused by failing to recognise the impact due to the resident’s vulnerabilities
2. £480 – inconvenience caused by failing to recognise the impact due to the resident’s vulnerabilities
3. £240 – time and effort of getting the complaint resolved
4. £30 – poor complaint handling
5. £600 – service failure for the repair delays and poor communication
The landlord offset £1,490.24 against the resident’s rent arrears and said it would send the remainder of £579.76 to the resident by cheque.
The resident has told us that the issue with damp and mould was ongoing. She believed this was due to the property being extremely cold and poorly insulated. She said the condition of the property had affected her physical and mental health. Although the landlord had completed some repairs she said the property was still cold and she spent a lot of time at her parent’s house as a result. As an outcome, she would like the landlord to:
1. improve the insulation in the property
2. complete the outstanding repairs
3. provide her with a copy of the asbestos report and the heat loss survey
4. increase the amount of compensation to reflect the time she had to deal with the damp and mould
5. consider the costs she had incurred in replacing damaged furniture, carpets, personal belongings, and redecorating the property
6. as an alternative, she would like the landlord to move her

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

In the interest of fairness, we have limited the scope of this investigation to the issues raised during the resident’s complaint dated 22 November 2022, which completed the landlord’s internal complaints procedure on 9 November 2023. This is because although we are aware the resident reported damp and mould issues in her property in 2018 and again in 2020, there is no evidence to show that she reported this issue again until September 2022. The records do not support a finding that damp and mould was a continuing issue from 2018 to 2020 and from 2020 to 2022. Events from earlier than September 2022 may be described where they provide important context.
The resident has raised concerns over the effect of the condition of the property on her physical and mental health. While we have no reason to disbelieve the resident, we are unable to arrive at firm conclusions on the cause of the resident’s health conditions. This is because we do not have the authority or expertise to do so in the way a court or insurer might.
The resident may wish to seek independent advice on making a personal injury claim if she considers that her health was affected by any action or failure by the landlord. While we cannot consider the effect on health, we can consider any general distress and inconvenience which the resident experienced because of any failure by the landlord.
The resident said she wanted to move properties and would like help from the landlord with this. We can understand the resident’s reasons for wanting to move. However, we would not order the landlord to move a resident immediately as part of our investigation. This is because we do not have access to information on the availability of suitable vacant properties owned by the landlord at any one time and we do not have details of any other prospective tenants waiting to move who may have higher priority than the resident for rehousing. We have however considered the landlord’s response to the resident’s request and whether it was fair and reasonable in the circumstances.

Damp and mould

Damp and mould are potential health hazards to be avoided or minimised in line with the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). The landlord as part of its obligations under section 9A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 must ensure the property is free from such hazards.
On 8 September 2022 the resident reported that the damp and mould had returned to her property. The landlord inspected the property on 14 September 2022. We have not seen the landlord’s Damp and Mould Policy which was in place at the time of the resident’s complaint or know if there was one. However in September 2022 the landlord assessed itself against the recommendations made in the Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould dated October 2021. This assessment set out an action plan on how the landlord would address damp and mould in its properties. We have therefore referred to this action plan throughout this report. The landlord’s attendance on 14 September 2022 was appropriate because it was in line with its damp and mould action plan which says it will complete an inspection within 5 days of receiving the report.
We have not seen the landlord’s inspection report for this date. However, internal correspondence shows the inspection found there were ventilation issues in the property which had caused the damp and mould. The landlord also noted other potential issues which it said it may need to address in the future. This included moss growing on the roof, no surface drainage, the reveal tolerance for the front door, rear elevation soffits, rear elevation damp proof course, and minor cracking in the rear elevation mortar joints.
On 23 September 2022 the landlord completed a mould wash to the bedroom. This attendance was appropriate because it was in line with its damp and mould action plan which says it will complete any follow-on repairs within 10 days.
The job report for the mould wash shows the contractor was unable to treat the wall behind the wardrobe. The resident said the surveyor had told her the contractor would move the wardrobe for her but the contractor refused. Having considered the contractor’s report it said it was unable to move the wardrobe because it was too big and too heavy. It said the resident would like the wall behind the wardrobe treated. There is no evidence that the landlord instructed the contractor to move the wardrobe, therefore it was reasonable that it did not do so. This is because it would need to ensure it was safe to do so. However, it is clear from the report that the resident wanted the wall behind the wardrobe treating and therefore the landlord should have returned to complete this. There is no evidence that it did this, which was a failure.
It was right that the landlord completed the mould wash and advised the resident to use the ventilator in her bedroom. However, the landlord was aware that the resident had been reporting damp and mould in the property for some years, it should therefore have investigated the other potential causes of the damp and mould which it noted at its inspection on 14 September 2022. Had it done so, this could have provided the resident with an earlier resolution and she may not have felt it necessary to escalate her complaint. It did not investigate other potential causes until the resident escalated her complaint.
In its stage 1 complaint response the landlord said it would add the resident’s property to its retrofit insulation list, to improve energy efficiency, reduce carbon emissions and lower heating costs, which it hoped would become available in April 2023. The landlord’s damp and mould action plan refers to the landlord’s commitment to improve its existing stock to make every home warm, dry, safe and, free from damp and mould. From 1 April 2024, it is a regulatory requirement that landlords ensure homes meet the requirements of the Decent Homes Guidance (see 1.2.1 of the Safety and Quality Standard). Part 5 of the Decent Homes Guidance states:

“The revised definition requires a dwelling to have both efficient heating and effective insulation.”

In its stage 2 complaint response the landlord said its surveyor confirmed in 2022 that there was no cavity wall insulation in the property but there were conflicting reports on this. While it was reasonable that the landlord agreed to add the resident to its retro insulation list, we have not seen any evidence that the landlord added the property to the list, or that it kept the resident updated. This is important to the resident because her illnesses mean that the cold severely affects her. We have therefore made an order that the landlord complete a cavity wall inspection to establish if there is cavity wall insulation in the property and, if so, whether it is effective or requires improvement.
The records show there was a gap of approximately 9 months between the resident’s contact on 7 December 2022 and when the landlord contacted her to discuss her complaint on 5 September 2023. The landlord’s damp and mould action plan says it will monitor cases of damp and mould for 12 months following the visit, which will include regular communication with the resident. As outlined above, the landlord was aware of the resident’s reports of damp and mould dating back to at least 2020. It would therefore have been reasonable for it to monitor the impact of the mould wash it completed in September 2022 and to check if the mould had returned. There is no evidence that it did this, which was a failure.
The landlord completed a further inspection on 5 October 2023, after which it raised more repairs. The landlord referred to these in its stage 2 complaint response and said it had allocated the repairs to the relevant teams to monitor going forward. The repairs included:
1. Check the trickle vents to all windows – the repair records show the landlord completed this on 2 November 2023.
2. Install a French drain – the repair records show the landlord completed this on 27 October 2023.
3. Jet the gully to the side of the property – the repair records show this as outstanding, although in its stage 2 complaint response the landlord said it completed this at the same time as the French drain.
4. Complete a heat loss survey – the repair records show the landlord completed the survey on 10 October 2023.
5. Repair a crack to the lounge wall and paint – the repair records show the landlord attended on 2 November 2023 but was unable to complete the repair due to a leak from the above property.
6. Inspect doors and windows for gaps and seal – the repair records show the landlord completed this on 2 November 2023.
7. An asbestos specialist to visit – the repair records show the landlord completed an asbestos inspection on 3 October 2023.
8. Check the radiators and provide quote to bleed and replace – the repair records show the landlord attended on 28 September 2023 to balance the radiators in the property. The landlord has since replaced all the radiators in the property for new.
9. Fit a new bath, panel, and a frame – the repair records show the landlord attended on 22 January 2025 but there was no access.
On 10 June 2024 the landlord contacted the resident because she had not cashed the compensation cheque. The resident informed the landlord that the coldness of the property was still affecting her and her health had deteriorated as a result. She said some of the repairs outlined in the stage 2 response were outstanding and she had not received any update or follow ups from the landlord, as follows:
1. Repair to the lounge wall – she had not received any update from the landlord on what action it had taken or when it would complete this repair.
2. Asbestos inspection – she had not received an update on this.
3. Welfare visit from landlord – the resident said she had not received any contact either in person or email.
The resident has told us that the landlord had not installed the French drain, jetted the gully or sealed the gaps in the doors and windows. Although the landlord’s repair records show these repairs as complete, it has not provided copies of the job reports. The job report provides the landlord with a paper trail to show when its contractors attended and what work it completed. Therefore, we cannot be satisfied, on the evidence provided, that it has completed the repairs it agreed to do.
Further to this, in its stage 2 complaint response the landlord referred to fitting a new flat door in 2024. The resident has informed us that the landlord had not replaced the door to date. Whilst this issue is not part of this complaint we have made a recommendation below that the landlord provide the resident with an update on this.
In relation to the repair to the bath, the resident has told us that she asked the landlord to put this repair on hold because she was considering getting adaptations to help with her bathing, due to her disabilities. We understand she has been in touch with an Occupational Therapist and the funding has been approved. We have therefore recommended the landlord contact her to discuss this and what the next steps are.
With regards to the resident’s request to be reimbursed for her damaged wardrobe, carpet and personal possessions, it is unclear when this damage occurred although we can see the resident referred to it in her initial complaint. The landlord’s Complaint Policy does not cover complaints about legal liability. The tenancy agreement says it is the resident’s responsibility to take out their own contents insurance for personal belongings. However, where a resident does not have their own insurance, the landlord will have its own liability insurance for when a resident believes a landlord has been negligent and caused damage to household contents, this can also include damage to health. At stage 2, the landlord advised the resident to make a claim against her own contents insurance and, if she did not have this, provided full details of how she could make a claim against the landlord’s insurance. Its response was therefore reasonable because it was in line with its policy. However, this information should have been provided at stage 1 of its complaints procedure.
While the landlord’s offer of compensation of £1,800 was in line with the Ombudsman’s Remedies Guidance, we cannot say that there has been reasonable redress because some of the repairs remain outstanding. We have therefore made a finding of maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.

The resident’s request to move

In her initial complaint in November 2022 the resident said she would like the landlord to move her to a more suitable property. The landlord was aware of the damp and mould at that time and also aware of the resident’s disabilities and the impact the property condition had on her.
The landlord’s Allocations and Lettings Policy says if a resident contacts the landlord for advice on moving it will assess their circumstances and give them options which are appropriate for their needs. This may include mutual exchange and applying to the local council’s housing register.
The policy also states, where there is a need to directly rehouse existing residents it will match the resident to a property through its rehousing list. It will add a resident to its rehousing list providing their circumstances meet certain criteria. One of the criteria is ‘the resident has a significant medical need which means their condition carries an immediate risk to life by remaining in their home or if they cannot access parts of their home due to the medical condition, or their home cannot be adapted’.
The policy goes on to outline that the landlord operates 2 priority needs panels, one for temporary moves and the other for permanent moves. It is the panels’ role to decide whether to add applicants to the rehousing list. When a resident makes a request for rehousing under medical needs, the landlord will include recommendations from an independent medical advisor.
Although we can see the landlord provided this information to the resident on 10 June 2024, this was 19 months after she first asked the landlord to move her. Had it provided the information sooner the resident could have applied to the landlord’s rehousing list. While we cannot say whether the landlord would have accepted her onto its rehousing list, the landlord would have considered her request and she would have received a response sooner. This was a failure.
We would consider this to be maladministration because it was an unnecessary delay which adversely affected the resident. The landlord should pay the resident compensation to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused.

Summary and conclusion

In summary, the landlord:
1. Delayed in addressing the damp and mould.
2. Failed to monitor the impact of the mould wash.
3. Failed to consider the resident’s medical conditions when scheduling and attending to the repairs.
4. Failed to follow up on actions and repairs it had agreed as part of its complaint responses.
5. Failed to manage communications with the resident about the progress and timescales associated with some of the repairs which resulted in the resident having to chase the landlord for updates.
6. Delayed in responding to the resident’s request to move.
When there are failings by a landlord, as is the case here, the Ombudsman will consider whether the redress offered by the landlord (apology, repairs and compensation) put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this, the Ombudsman considers whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles; be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
The landlord acted fairly by it apologising for the inconvenience caused to the resident due to delays in it actioning damp and mould works. It acknowledged the resident had been frustrated by the poor communication and having to chase the landlord for updates. It also provided relevant information on how the resident could make a claim against its insurance policy.
The landlord showed its attempt to put things right by completing a mould wash, replacing the radiators, completing some repairs and offered compensation of £1,800. (£1,200 for the distress and inconvenience caused for its failure to recognise the impact due to the resident’s vulnerabilities and £600 for the delays and poor communication in relation to the repairs.)
The landlord failed to recognise any learning from outcomes in its complaint responses. We have therefore made a recommendation that the landlord complete a review of this case to identify any learning it can take from it.
While the landlord’s offer of compensation was in line with the Ombudsman’s Remedies Guidance, there are repairs which remain outstanding. Therefore the landlord has not adequately addressed all the issues and we have made orders below to reflect this.
We understand the landlord offset £1,490.24 of the resident’s compensation against her rent arrears. The resident has told us that she was disappointed with this decision. Whilst this is not something we would order, we cannot say the landlord’s decision was unreasonable. This is because its Compensation Policy allows it to offset compensation payments against any debt owed to it.

Complaint handling

The landlord operates a 2-stage complaint process. At stage 1, it will acknowledge the complaint within 5 working days of being made and will provide its response within 10 working days thereafter. At stage 2, it will acknowledge escalation of the complaint within 5 working days and provide its response within 20 working days thereafter.
The landlord appropriately acknowledged the complaint and issued its stage 1 complaint response within the landlord’s published timeframes. However, the stage 1 complaint response did not consider the background of the case or address all the issues raised by the resident in her complaint. For example, it did not address the issue relating to the contractor not completing the mould wash behind the wardrobe, the impact on the resident’s disabilities, the resident’s costs of replacing furniture, carpets and personal belongings, or the resident’s request to be rehoused. This was not appropriate because it was not in line with the landlord’s Complaint Policy or paragraphs 5.4, 5.6, and 6.4 of the Complaint Handling Code (the Code) (2022).
At stage 2 there was a delay of 188 working days before the landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint. It then emailed the resident on 15 October 2023 explaining that it was waiting for updates from contractors and it needed to extend the deadline to issue its stage 2 response. Although it was right that the landlord informed the resident of its need to extend this deadline, it failed to provide her with a clear timeframe for when she would receive the response. This was a failure because it was not consistent with the landlord’s policy or paragraph 5.13 of the Code.
In its complaint handling the landlord acknowledged its failures which included poor overall complaint handling and the time and effort the resident had taken in getting the complaint resolved. It offered £270 compensation to recognise these failures.
Our guidance on remedies suggests that an award of £270 may remedy failings such as those acknowledged by the landlord where there was a significant impact on the resident. Given the extent of the landlord’s failings, the apology made, and the compensation awarded we consider this to be a reasonable offer by the landlord to put things right. This leads to a finding of reasonable redress in relation to the landlord’s complaint handling.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its response to the resident’s request to move.
In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Scheme, there was reasonable redress by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

The landlord must, within 4 weeks of the date of this report:
1. Provide the resident with a full written apology for the failures identified in this report. The apology must come from a manager.
2. Pay the resident compensation of £2,320 (an increase of £250) which is comprised of:
  1. £1,800 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould.
  2. £250 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience cause by the landlord’s response to the resident’s request to be moved.
  3. £270 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.
3. This award replaces any offer made to date by the landlord through its internal complaints process. The landlord is entitled to offset against this sum any payments already made to the resident. All payments must be paid directly to the resident and not credited to the rent account unless otherwise agreed by the resident.
4. Complete the repair to the lounge wall.
5. Provide evidence to this Service that it has completed the following repairs:
  1. Fit a French drain.
  2. Jet the gully to prevent flooding.
6. If the above repairs are outstanding, it must complete them within 4 weeks of the date of this report.
7. The landlord must inspect the property within 4 weeks of the date of this report. The inspection must:
  1. Comment on the condition of the property overall and whether it is fit for human habitation.
  2. Comment on whether there are any category 1 or 2 hazards under the HHSRS.
  3. Comment on whether there is sufficient cavity wall insulation.
  4. Comment on all repair issues in the property.
  5. Provide date and time stamped photographs.
8. Within 2 weeks of completing the inspection, share a copy of its inspection report with this Service and the resident. It must:
  1. Prepare a schedule of works with timescales for when it will start and complete the works.
  2. Apply its Decant Policy as to whether the resident should be given temporary accommodation during the works.
9. The landlord must then use its best endeavours to ensure it starts and completes the works within the timescales it sets out.
10. Provide the resident with an update on its retrofit programme.
11. Within 12 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is to provide full assistance to the resident in making an insurance claim for the items she lost due to the landlord’s failure to address the damp and mould and the delay in advising her of its insurance procedure. If the insurance claim is unsuccessful the landlord ought to provide the resident with the reasonable replacement costs for the items she has lost.
12. The landlord must provide the Ombudsman with evidence of how it has complied with the above orders within 12 weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendations

We recommend the landlord:
1. Carry out a review of this case to identify what went wrong and what learning it can take from it.
2. Contact the resident to discuss her rehousing options.
3. Share a copy of the heat loss survey with the resident.
4. Share a copy of the asbestos report with the resident.
5. Contact the resident to discuss the bathroom adaptations and what the next steps are, should the resident wish to proceed with this.
6. Provide the resident with an update on its door replacement programme.