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

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202432458)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202432458

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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
    1. Requests for repairs to the heating and hot water system.
    2. Associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the property, a 1-bedroom ground floor flat owned by the landlord, a housing association. He is vulnerable with several medical conditions and undergoing cancer treatment, which the landlord is aware of.
  2. The resident reported a loss of heating and hot water to the landlord on 1 August 2023. He reported further issues on 24 April 2024 as the heating was permanently switched on.
  3. On 29 May 2024 the landlord’s contractor reported to it that the heating system had a faulty printed circuit board (PCB). They also said the heat interface unit (HIU) was beyond economical repair and recommended replacing it.
  4. The resident complained to the landlord on 5 June 2024, stating that the thermostat broke over 2 years ago. He said he chased up the issue on 24 April 2024 and although a contractor attended, they did not have the part to fix it. He said he continued to chase the issue on 3, 10, and 22 May 2024 but the repairs remained outstanding. He asked for an update and a proposed timescale for when the landlord would replace the unit.
  5. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 21 October 2024. It said its contractors said the HIU had been serviced and either the PCB needed to be replaced or the whole HIU system needed replacing. It would continue to chase the matter up. It also apologised for the delay responding along with the inconvenience and lack of communication.
  6. The resident said he was dissatisfied with the landlord’s decision later the same day and asked to escalate the complaint. He said he was not happy with the lack of communication and complaint handling.
  7. The landlord provided its final complaint response on 24 October 2024. It said it mistakenly logged the resident’s initial complaint as a query instead of a complaint. It said it was still waiting for the contractor to confirm what works it would complete and apologised for not being able to offer an exact timeframe. It acknowledged there were service failures in its complaint handling process. It offered compensation of £100 (£40 for inconvenience, £20 for time and effort, and £40 for its complaint handling).
  8. The resident wants the landlord to replace the heating system or provide a lasting repair.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. In this case, the resident said he had reported repair issues with the heating system for over 2 years. However, there are no records to show he raised a complaint with the landlord until 5 June 2024. Therefore, the Ombudsman’s investigation will focus on the landlord’s handling of requests for repairs from June 2023. We cannot consider the previous incidents in assessing the landlord’s handling of the present case as these have become historical and cannot reasonably be investigated at this time. The Ombudsman encourages residents to raise complaints with their landlords at the time the events happen.
  2. The Scheme says the Ombudsman may not consider complaints made prior to having exhausted a member’s complaints procedure. This would include any issues that arose following the landlord’s final response of 24 October 2024. Consequently, this investigation’s assessment is limited to events that occurred up to the final complaint response. Evidence shows the resident raised a new complaint to the landlord for further issues, which have been through a separate complaint process. We have created a new complaint reference for the more recent complaint and will deal with it as a separate but related case.
  3. In addition, the pre-action protocol on housing conditions process is currently ongoing as it was begun by the resident on the further events in this case as well as more repairs issues. It is unclear at what point the process started, but it is clear it remains ongoing. As such, this report will not be assessing the adequacy of the landlord’s actions on the repairs but is focussing on the adequacy of its responses in its internal complaint process. This approach is because if the parties are still negotiating, we will not be deciding on the nature or terms of any agreement.

Requests for repairs to the heating and hot water system

  1. Under the resident’s occupancy agreement, the landlord is required to keep any heating and water heating it provides repaired and working. The landlord was therefore under a duty to repair the heating system within a reasonable time of being given notice that it was not in working order. This is also set out in the implied terms in s.11(1)(c) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
  2. In its repairs policy, the landlord states it will complete routine repairs in an average of 25 calendar days. For emergency works, where there is an immediate danger to the resident, it will attend within 24 hours. For emergency works that occur out of hours, it will attend within four hours to ‘make safe’ and lower the immediate risk.
  3. Following the resident reporting having no heating or hot water on 1 August 2023, the landlord’s contractor attended the same day. However, the contractor reported being unable to gain access to the property. It is unclear from the landlord’s records why there was no access.
  4. The landlord raised a further repair job on 6 August 2023. Its contractor attended the following day and completed the repair to the heating system.
  5. There is no evidence of any further contact from the resident until nearly 8 months later on 24 April 2024 when he reported the thermostat was broken and the heating was permanently switched on. He therefore could not regulate the heat from the radiators or the heat of the hot water. The landlord’s contractor reported they completed the job the same day. However, we note the resident later raised in his complaint to the landlord that the contractor did not have the correct parts to fix the issue.
  6. On 29 May 2024 the contractor reported the PCB had an intermittent fault causing issues with the heating. They said the hot water was scalding hot because the hot water actuator was faulty and had been removed by the previous contractor. They also said the HIU was beyond economical repair, and they recommended that it should be replaced. The landlord therefore raised work for its contractor to replace the faulty HIU. There is no evidence this work was completed.
  7. Following the resident’s complaint of 5 June 2024, the landlord wrote to him on 14 June 2024. It said its contractor would contact him directly to arrange an appointment to replace the faulty PCB. We note it did not mention the HIU that was regarded as beyond economical repair and needed replacing. On the same day, it raised a work order for its contractor to replace the PCB by 12 July 2024. The contractor later reported it completed the work to replace the PCB on 12 July 2024.
  8. Following a telephone call with the resident, the landlord wrote to him on 11 September 2024. It said all residences would need to undergo a HIU servicing in order to know the exact status of the HIU and what their faults were. It asked if his HIU had been serviced and it would need to be done if not. This raises the question of how robust the landlord’s record keeping is seeing that its contractors had already reported the HIU was beyond economical repair and needed replacing. The resident responded the same day and confirmed all servicing had been completed.
  9. On 10 October 2024 the resident reported to the landlord he had no heating. The landlord raised a repair job, which was cancelled.
  10. When the landlord issued its stage 1 response of 21 October 2024 it had been nearly 5 months since it raised work for its contractor to replace the faulty HIU. Within the stage 1 response the landlord said the HIU had been serviced and either the PCB needed to be replaced or the whole HIU system needed replacing. As its contractors reported nearly 5 months prior that the HIU was beyond economical repair and needed replacing, it is unclear why the landlord did not mention this its response. It would have been reasonable for it to have explained why it was not taking this forward at the time. It also did not acknowledge the resident had been living with scalding hot water that could pose a serious health risk. In addition, it did not offer any compensation to acknowledge the delays to completing the works and inconvenience caused. This is not in line with its own compensation policy or that of this Service.
  11. In its final complaint response of 24 October 2024, the landlord did not offer any timescales for completion of the required work, which is unreasonable. However, it did offer compensation of £40 for inconvenience and £20 for time and effort, which we do not consider to be adequate.
  12. Since then, there is evidence a disrepair claim has begun under the pre-action protocol process, the current status of which is not currently known to this Service.
  13. In summary, the Ombudsman finds that the landlord’s  decision and offer of compensation within its complaints process was inadequate. There is no evidence it provided appropriate updates to the resident. It should have considered the impact the issues would have had on the resident at a time when he was also undergoing treatment for cancer.
  14. Therefore, we are ordering the landlord to apologise to and pay the resident £400 compensation. This considers the failings mentioned above and is within the bracket the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance would award for failures of this nature resulting in maladministration that adversely affected the resident.

The associated complaint

  1. Under the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) landlords must ensure they acknowledge a complaint within 5 working days. They must respond to the complaint within 10 working days of the acknowledgment at stage 1. They must also acknowledge an escalation request within 5 working days and provide a final response within 20 working days of the date of acknowledging the escalation request. The landlord’s complaints policy is compliant with the above requirements of the Code.
  2. When the resident raised on online complaint on 5 June 2024 the landlord incorrectly logged it as a query instead of a complaint. This meant it did not acknowledge the complaint and delayed sending its stage 1 response for over 4 months. This was not in line with the Code or the landlord’s own complaint policy to respond within 10 working days. The stage 1 response also did not offer any redress.
  3. The landlord then issued its final complaint response on 24 October 2024. This was within the required timescales. It acknowledged service failures with its complaint handling process with respect to the past events and offered £40 compensation for that.
  4. In summary, the landlord failed to log the complaint correctly, which resulted in a delay of over 4 months responding to the resident’s complaint. However, it recognised its failings and offered the resident adequate resolution in its stage 2 decision.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s requests for repairs to the heating and hot water system.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Scheme, there was reasonable redress in respect of the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord must within 28 days of the date of this determination:
    1. Provide the resident with an apology for the failings outlined in this report.
    2. Pay the resident total compensation of £400 (less any amount the landlord has already paid), in recognition of the time, trouble, distress, and inconvenience caused by the failures in its complaint responses to the resident’s requests for repairs to the heating and hot water system.
  2. All payments must be paid directly to the resident and not credited to the rent account unless otherwise agreed by the resident.

Recommendations

  1. We recommend the landlord pays the resident the compensation it had previously offered totalling £40 in recognition of the time, trouble, distress, and inconvenience caused by its failures to appropriately handle the associated complaint (if it has not done so already). The finding of reasonable redress has been based on the landlord making this payment to the resident.