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

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202442856)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202442856

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

14 July 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 damp and mould including its delay in completing an inspection.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is the assured tenant of the property, which is a 3-bedroom house. The landlord is a housing association. The landlord has recorded that the resident is vulnerable due to illness. The resident told it she is disabled and has respiratory issues.
  2. The landlord’s records refer to the resident having reported damp in October 2020 and May 2021. It also raised repairs for penetrating damp in May 2022 which it marked as cancelled. On 3 August 2022 it raised a repair for a specialist damp and mould survey, which it completed 2 days later. Its report said there was mould in the hallway, living room, bathroom and kitchen. It suggested damp and mould was caused by a defective or lack of a damp proof course, and a possible roof flashing leak. It completed a mould wash during the inspection. The resident reported damp and mould again on 1 November 2022 and said it was causing her breathing difficulties. The landlord completed a mould wash on 11 November 2022, and said there were high moisture levels, peeling paint, and water marks.
  3. On 15 November 2022 a specialist company inspected the property and provided a report to the landlord on 29 November 2022. The report said damp was being caused by residual water following an historical leak, an issue with the damp proof course, and an issue with the roof where a chimney used to be. The report contained a schedule of recommended works and a quote. The resident called the landlord on 30 June 2023 to chase up the works. The landlord’s notes say a variation order (VO) had been submitted on 23 January 2023 but had yet to be approved. Its records say the VO was declined on 2 November 2023 without explanation. The resident called it again on 10 January 2024 to ask for an update on the works. It emailed her on 14 March 2024 and said it was “sorry to hear damp and/or mould has returned to your home”. It asked her to provide photographs and her thoughts on the possible causes.
  4. The resident made a stage 1 complaint on 22 October 2024, which was about:
    1. Unresolved damp and mould in the property since 2011. This had affected her living conditions and had damaged her possessions. She said she was disabled, and the conditions were negatively affecting her health.
    2. There had been many inspections and reports but no remedial works.
    3. The landlord not having complied with its legal obligations as set out in legislation and had failed to make reasonable adjustments for her disability.
  5. The landlord acknowledged the complaint the same day. It requested internally for a damp and mould inspection and chased again on 1 November 2024. It provided its stage 1 response on 4 November 2024, in which it said it had requested a new inspection, as the last one had taken place 2 years previously. It said the surveyor would contact the resident to book the appointment. It tried to call her and sent an email on 8 November 2024 asking her to contact it to book the inspection. She asked to escalate her complaint on 27 November 2024 as she said she had not been contacted to arrange the inspection. She said the condition of the property was making her health worse. The landlord acknowledged escalation the same day.
  6. On 3 December 2024 the landlord emailed the resident to say it had tried to call her to book the inspection. It exchanged internal emails on 10 December 2024 to chase the inspection as it said she had told it she had not been contacted. The resident also told it she “feels invisible” and reiterated she had a disability including respiratory issues. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 11 December 2024, in which it:
    1. Apologised that she had not been contacted to book the inspection. It acknowledged her vulnerabilities and the extended time she had waited for her issues to be resolved.
    2. Said it had chased up the inspection and its surveyor would contact her promptly.
    3. Upheld the complaint and offered £900 compensation for distress and inconvenience, time and trouble.
  7. In an internal email on 13 May 2025 the landlord said it had tried to call the resident. She called it back that day and it asked internally for a call back to book the appointment. The landlord attempted this on 15 May 2025 but there was no answer. Following contact from the Ombudsman, the landlord tried to call the resident again to book an inspection on 4 July 2025. It also sent her a text message asking her to make contact.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident has raised within her complaint to the landlord and the Ombudsman that her health has been negatively affected by the landlord’s delay in resolving the damp and mould. While this Service can consider the overall impact of the situation on the resident, including distress and inconvenience, time and trouble, the Ombudsman cannot determine causation or liability for personal injury like a court can. If the resident does wish to pursue a personal injury claim she may wish to seek independent legal advice.

The landlord’s handling of damp and mould including its delay in completing an inspection

  1. Under the tenancy agreement the landlord is responsible for repairs to maintain the structure and exterior of the property. This is in line with section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. The landlord’s repairs policy says it is responsible for penetrating and rising damp, condensation and mould repairs. It will complete routine repairs within 25 calendar days.
  2. The landlord’s damp and mould policy was implemented in May 2023. Following it, when a report of damp and mould is made, it will assess if a repair is required. It will arrange a survey within 20 working days and will raise any remedial works identified within 10 working days of the survey. It says it will complete repairs in line with its repairs policy and will be clear with the resident on timescales. The policy says the landlord will keep residents informed of actions, next steps, and will communicate regularly. Under both policies the landlord says it will consider the resident’s vulnerabilities.
  3. When the resident reported damp and mould in 2022 the landlord correctly and promptly completed a survey and mould wash. This was in line with its later policy approach. Following a further report from the resident, it asked a specialist company to survey the property which was solution focused. The specialist company provided its schedule of repairs needed on 29 November 2022, but the landlord failed to carry out any repairs. When the resident chased it, 7 months later, it failed to agree to the works. It then rejected the VO in November 2023 almost a year after the specialist survey. The landlord failed to provide a reason for its delay in considering the works, or a reason for rejecting them. It did not keep in contact with the resident or take any action to resolve the damp and mould which was a significant failing.
  4. The landlord failed to take any action when the resident chased it in January 2024. It should have followed its damp and mould policy then in use. It sent her an inappropriate email in March 2024, which referred to damp and mould returning to the property when there is no evidence it had ever gone away. Its email shows it had not referred to its records on the previous inspection and outstanding repairs needed. It also failed to follow its damp and mould policy by not arranging a new inspection at that point.
  5. When the resident made her stage 1 complaint the landlord correctly raised a damp and mould survey, in line with its policy. It explained within its response that it needed to complete a new survey as 2 years had passed since its last, which was reasonable. It tried to contact the resident to book the survey within its 20-working day policy timeframe. There is no evidence it made further contact attempts until after the resident escalated her complaint. The resident disputed that the landlord contacted her. There is no evidence that the landlord tried to check that the telephone number and/or email address it had for her were correct, which would have been helpful and proactive. It could have also tried writing to or visiting the resident.
  6. Within its stage 2 response the landlord correctly apologised and offered £900 compensation for distress and inconvenience, time and trouble. In relation to the failures identified, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this the Ombudsman takes into account 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, as well as our own guidance on remedies.
  7. The Housing Act 2004 introduced the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). One of the 29 identified hazards is damp and mould. Landlords need to make sure their homes are safe and free from hazards. When a resident reports a risk, the landlord should quickly inspect the property to check for hazards. It must determine if the home is safe and fit to live in. Ignoring hazards can lead to serious consequences for everyone involved.
  8. Additionally, the resident told the landlord she was disabled, and it was aware that she was vulnerable due to illness. Although the landlord may not be a public body it may have been exercising a public function when managing the condition of its social housing. Therefore, it may have obligations under the Equality Act 2010. These include to have due regard to its obligations to eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity, and foster good relations, and how its decisions may impact a person with a protected characteristic, to ensure there is no discrimination. Disability is a protected characteristic.
  9. The Ombudsman cannot make decisions on whether a landlord has breached the Equality Act 2010 like a court can. However, there is no evidence the landlord had due regard in considering the effects damp and mould may have had on a disabled, or vulnerably ill, resident when it delayed and then decided not to complete recommended works. The consequences of not completing works to resolve damp and mould may have been more severe for a disabled person.
  10. Overall, there was severe maladministration. While the landlord acted quickly and positively to reports of damp and mould in 2022, it failed to complete the works recommended by its specialist company. It failed to keep in contact with the resident or provide updates until she made her stage 1 complaint. The landlord left the resident with damp and mould for a protracted amount of time, as almost 2 years passed before she made her complaint. While it has made efforts to arrange a new survey since the complaint, it should have done more to achieve this, including to check it had the correct contact details.
  11. To reflect the distress and inconvenience, frustration, time and trouble caused, an order has been made that the landlord pay £2,365 compensation to the resident. This amount represents approximately 15% of the rent due between 29 November 2022 and the date of this report, minus the £900 compensation it has already paid. It is also lower than what would have been ordered to reflect the difficulty the landlord has had in contacting the resident since she made her stage 1 complaint.

The landlord’s complaint handling

  1. The landlord correctly acknowledged and responded to both the stage 1 and 2 complaints in line with its complaints policy. This was also in line with the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code).
  2. Within its stage 1 response the landlord failed to respond to the resident’s complaint. Its policy defines a complaint as per paragraph 1.2 of the Code. It is an expression of dissatisfaction about the standard of service, actions or lack of actions by the landlord. The resident clearly stated within her complaint that it was about its failure to resolve the damp and mould or to consider her disability. It was positive that it said what it would do to put things right by arranging an inspection, but it failed to answer the complaint. While under its policy it can exclude complaints relating to matters which occurred over 12 months previously, it did not do so. To do so it would have had to have explicitly stated this within its response as per its policy. It was correct that it did not do so, as the resident was complaining about an ongoing issue.
  3. Under paragraph 6.7 of the Code, landlords must address all points raised and provide clear reasons for decisions. The landlord’s policy also says it will investigate all elements of the complaint. It stage 1 response did not comply with the Code or its policy. At stage 2 the landlord again failed to provide a full response to the complaint as raised. Positively it acknowledged the delays the resident had incurred and offered compensation.
  4. There was maladministration as the landlord did not address the complaint. If it had done so, it may have been able to explain why it had not completed the recommended repairs. It would have been able to acknowledge and apologise for this and offer appropriate compensation. By not responding fully it has caused further time and trouble for the resident. To reflect this impact an order has been made that the landlord pay £100 additional compensation, which is in line with our guidance on remedies.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was severe maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of damp and mould including its delay in completing an inspection.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in relation to the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Provide a written apology to the resident, from the chief executive, for the failings detailed in this report.
    2. Pay directly to the resident £2,465 compensation made up of:
      1. £2,365 for the distress and inconvenience, frustration, time and trouble caused by its severe maladministration.
      2. £100 for the time and trouble caused by its complaint handling failings.
    3. Visit the property to check it has up to date contact details and offer to book a damp and mould survey with the resident if she is home. If she is not, it is to hand deliver a letter with details of how she can book the inspection.
  2. Within 8 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to carry out a case review to include, but not be limited to:
    1. Why it did not carry out the works recommended in November 2022.
    2. Why it failed to communicate with the resident to arrange alternative works before she made her complaint.
    3. Why it failed to fully investigate and respond to her complaint.
    4. Consideration of whether further complaint handling staff training is needed.
  3. The landlord is ordered to confirm compliance with these orders to this Service by the stated deadlines.