London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202307372)

A blue and grey text

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202307372

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

18 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 the resident’s:
1. Reports of damp walls.
2. Concerns about the condition of the property’s doors and windows.
The Ombudsman has considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

The resident has been an assured tenant of a ground-floor flat since 1995.
Between January 2020 and July 2022, the landlord recorded the resident’s walls were damp.
The resident complained to the landlord on 22 September 2022. She said she was unhappy it had not repaired the damp walls. The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 26 September 2022. It said the matter had been referred to its surveyor.
The resident complained to the landlord again on 28 March 2023. She said it had not repaired the walls. She also said her wooden doors and windows were in poor condition.
The landlord sent a further stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 14 April 2023. It said it would carry out repair works to the walls, windows and doors. It offered her £10 compensation for it delaying in responding to her complaint.
The resident asked the landlord to review her complaint on 3 May 2023.
The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 5 January 2024. It apologised and offered £560 compensation for not carrying out repairs to the walls and for delaying in responding to her complaint.
The resident contacted the Ombudsman on 30 May 2024 as she remained dissatisfied with landlord’s handling of her complaint.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

The landlord’s records from 2020 show it was aware the walls at the resident’s property were damp. We encourage residents to raise complaints with their landlord in a timely manner. This is because our Scheme states we may not investigate complaints that were not brought to the landlord’s attention within a reasonable time, normally 12 months from when the issue is first raised. This is so the landlord has a reasonable opportunity to consider the issues while they are still ‘live’, and while the evidence is available to reach an informed conclusion on the events which occurred. As the substantive issues become historical, it is increasingly difficult for either the landlord, or an independent body such as the Ombudsman, to conduct an effective review of the actions taken to address those issues.
In this case the landlord’s records from before 2022 are limited. This assessment will make a determination on the matters raised from May 2022 to when we accepted the complaint in June 2024. It will also include any relevant subsequent events. Any dates mentioned outside this period in this assessment are for the purpose of providing context only.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp walls

The landlord’s records do not show when the resident first reported the property having damp walls. On 8 January 2020 the landlord recorded the communal outside porch and hallway walls were damp. The landlord said it could be due to rising damp or a leak.
The next record of the landlord investigating the damp walls was on 12 May 2022. It is not recorded if this was following a report by the resident. The landlord said it found paint was bubbling on the communal porch wall and wallpaper was peeling in the communal hallway. It also recorded on 27 July 2022 the porch wall was crumbling. The landlord attended the property on 4 September 2022. It said it found no leaks which could be causing the damp.
The landlord’s repairs policy states it is responsible for repairing internal and external walls, including in common entrance ways, which are affected by penetrative or rising damp. The landlord’s damp and mould policy states when a resident reports damp in a property it will arrange for its specialist contractor to visit and assess the property within 20 working days. It adds that any remedial action will be carried out within 10 working days of the assessment. If multiple fixes are required, the policy states the landlord will keep the resident updated on its progress.
Due to the lack of records to confirm when the matter was reported to the landlord, we not able to determine whether its response time was in line with that detailed in its damp and mould policy. However, there is no evidence to suggest it undertook works within 10 days of the assessment which identified damp at the property. This failure was a breach of its policy.
The resident complained to the landlord on 22 September 2022. She said she was not happy with the condition of the damp communal walls.
On 26 September 2022 the landlord sent a response to the resident at stage 1 of its complaints process. The landlord said it found no leaks when it inspected the walls, so it had referred the matter to its surveyor. The landlord said it appreciated the issue with the walls was taking longer to resolve than it hoped. It said it would keep her updated on the actions it was taking.
A review of the landlord’s complaint response shows it accepted there were outstanding works required regarding the damp walls and referred the matter to its surveyor. It did not give details of any work it would undertake. The landlord failed to offer any redress for its failure to follow its policy timescales for conducting the repairs following its assessment.
The resident complained to the landlord on 28 March 2023. She said the landlord had not repaired the damp walls. The evidence shows no subsequent inspection was completed by the landlord after it said it had referred to its surveyor.
The evidence shows the landlord failed to follow its damp and mould policy and the commitments made to the resident in its stage 1 response. The lack of action to address the damp walls in the 6 months after it referred the matter to its surveyor was unreasonable, and it prompted the resident to make another complaint.
On 14 April 2023 the landlord sent a further stage 1 complaint response to the resident. The landlord said it had raised the damp issue with its surveyor and building supervisor. It said repair works on the damp walls would start within 20 days. The landlord apologised for the inconvenience caused by the delay in arranging the repairs.
A review of the landlord’s complaint response shows it did not acknowledge its failure to follow its damp and mould policy and take repair actions following its previous stage 1 complaint response. It failed to identify or compensate the resident for its service failure or the delay of 7 months which occurred as a result.
On 3 May 2023 the resident asked the landlord to review her complaint. The landlord acknowledged the complaint the same day.
The resident called the landlord several times between 14 July and 5 September 2023. She said no repairs had been carried out on the damp walls.
No action was taken until a landlord operative attended the resident’s property on 29 November 2023. The resident called the landlord the same day. She said the operative did not do any repairs, as they told her the walls needed to be checked for rising damp.
The landlord told the resident on 6 December 2023 it would repair the walls on 2 April 2024. The resident said she was not happy with the proposed timescale. The resident told the landlord on 15 December 2023 the matter was causing her stress.
The landlord’s surveyor inspected the property on 20 December 2023. They confirmed the walls had rising damp. The surveyor raised a work order for damp proofing of the porch and hallway walls, with redecoration to be completed after that.
On 5 January 2024 the landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident. It upheld her complaint. The landlord said it had referred the rising damp in the walls to a damp proofing contractor. It confirmed remedial works would be carried out once the damp proofing was complete.
The landlord apologised for the level of service the resident had received regarding its handling of the damp walls. The landlord offered £460 compensation to the resident, which comprised of:
1. £180 for the distress and inconvenience caused.
2. £180 for the time and effort taken to resolve the complaint.
3. £100 for its lack of communication.
Analysis of the landlord’s complaint response shows it apologised for its delays in carrying out repairs and it offered redress for lack of action. It detailed the steps it would take to fix the issue, but it failed to provide a timescale for those works.
The landlord’s contractor carried out damp proofing work on the walls on 22 May 2024. This was over 4 months after the landlord had identified the need for the work to take place. The time taken to complete the first stage of the works it had committed to was significantly outside of its repair policy timescales. The landlord has not provided any evidence of it carrying out the follow-on redecoration works it said it would conduct following the damp proofing.
The resident told us on 15 May 2025 the walls are still damp. She said the landlord has not inspected the damp proofing work since it was completed.
The evidence shows by the end of the landlord’s internal complaints procedure the resident was still waiting for the landlord to fix the issue that had been reported to it some 18 months previously. The landlord’s delays were far beyond its policy timescales and were unreasonable. Its handling of the issue comprised of several undertakings to conduct the necessary works, followed by inaction, non-delivery and service failure.
Following the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response the landlord still failed to take prompt and effective action. It took a further 4 months to complete damp proofing and the landlord failed to redecorate the affected area as it previously promised.
When a failure is identified, as in this case, our 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, we take 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.
In summary, the landlord failed to follow its repairs and damp and mould policy timescales despite making assurances to the resident during its complaint responses. The landlords offer of redress for its delays was not reflective of the distress and inconvenience caused by its failure to address the communal damp walls issue over a prolonged period. This was further compounded by the landlord taking another 4 months to complete the damp proofing works following the conclusion of its complaints process, which was again outside of its policy timescale.
The failures identified above, together with the failure to offer redress which put things right for the resident leads to a determination of maladministration. An order for increased compensation has been made below.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about the condition of the property’s doors and windows

It is not clear from the landlord’s records when the resident first raised concerns with it regarding the condition of her doors and windows. The landlord recorded on 28 March 2023 its surveyor had inspected the property. The surveyor said the doors and windows at the resident’s property were wooden and needed to be re-painted before winter to stop water ingress.
The landlord’s repairs policy states it is responsible for repairing doors and window frames. The landlord’s policy classifies these repair issues as routine repairs. The policy states it aims to complete routine repairs within 25 calendar days. Although it is not clear when the matter was first raised and therefore not possible to ascertain if the landlord complied with the timescales set out in its policy, the evidence shows the landlord inspected the doors and windows and agreed to carry out repairs.
On 28 March 2023 the resident complained to the landlord the doors and windows needed to be re-painted.
The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 14 April 2023. It said it would obtain a quote to paint the exterior of the doors and windows.
A review of the landlord’s complaint response shows it failed to provide a timescale for when it would carry out the repairs.
The resident called the landlord on 3 May 2023. She said she had been told by someone from the landlord that it would not carry out the re-painting of the doors and windows. She said she wanted to escalate her complaint. The landlord’s records show it acknowledged the resident’s complaint, however it has not provided any information to bring to light why or how it had told the resident it had decided not to carry out the repairs it had committed to.
The resident asked the landlord to respond to her complaint several times between July and December 2023. On 15 December 2023 she told the landlord the matter was causing her stress.
The landlord spoke to the resident about her complaint on 18 December 2023. It sent its surveyor to inspect the property on 20 December 2023. The surveyor recorded the external woodwork of the doors and windows was weathered, but in good condition, so it did not need to be re-painted.
On 5 January 2024 the landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident. It said its surveyor had inspected the property and decided the doors and windows were in good condition and did not need to be re-painted.
Analysis of the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response shows it stated its change in position. Whilst the landlord is entitled to rely upon the advice of its trained staff, the response did not explain why a second survey had reached a different conclusion from that communicated in its stage 1 complaint response sent in April 2023.
The resident emailed the landlord on 7 and 8 January 2024. She said the landlord’s failure to paint the doors and windows as previously agreed meant they had been damaged by water ingress.
The landlord replied to the resident on 9 and 31 January 2024. It apologised for the miscommunication regarding the decision not to paint the doors and windows. The landlord reiterated its surveyor formed the opinion no action should be taken to paint them. The landlord added it planned to survey the property in 2025 to check for possible repair works.
In summary, the evidence shows the landlord gave contradictory information to the resident in its complaint responses as to whether it would re-paint the doors and windows.
The landlord’s failure to explain to the resident its decision not to re-paint the doors and windows for several months following its initial agreement to do so was unreasonable. This communication failure caused distress and inconvenience to the resident. Furthermore, the landlord’s lack of explanation as to its change of decision appears contrary to the resident’s reports the doors and windows have been damaged by water ingress due to remaining unpainted. This leaves the matter unresolved for the resident. These failures lead to a determination of maladministration. An order for compensation has been made below.

Complaint handling

The landlord operates a 2 stage complaints process. Its complaints policy states it will acknowledge complaints by the end of the next working day it is raised. It should respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days. It should acknowledge stage 2 complaints within 5 working days of the escalation and respond to them within 20 working days. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code).
On 22 September 2022 the resident complained to the landlord about it not repairing the damp walls. The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 26 September 2022. This was within its policy timescale.
The resident made a further complaint about the damp walls to the landlord on 28 March 2023. The landlord did not escalate the complaint to stage 2 of its complaints process. This was not in accordance with paragraph 6.10 of the Code, which says if all or part of the complaint is not resolved to the resident’s satisfaction, it must be progressed to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaints procedure. The landlord’s failure to follow its complaints process and the Code was unreasonable, and it delayed the resident’s complaint unnecessarily.
The resident also raised a new complaint about the condition of her doors and windows on the same day, which the landlord did not acknowledge at that time.
The landlord sent another stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 14 April 2023. This was slightly outside of its response policy timescale and was unlikely to cause any detriment to the resident. The landlord responded to the complaints about both the wall repairs and the condition of her doors and windows. The landlord offered the resident £10 compensation for the delay in replying to her complaint.
Paragraph 6.8 of the Code states when new issues are raised, they must be logged as a new complaint. As the resident had raised a new complaint about her doors and windows, it was appropriate for the landlord to send a stage 1 complaint response for this matter.
However, the resident had already received a stage 1 response regarding the complaint about damp walls. By not escalating the damp walls complaint to stage 2, as per its complaint process and the Code, the landlord lengthened the complaints process unnecessarily.
On 3 May 2023 the resident asked the landlord to review her complaint. The landlord acknowledged the complaint the same day.
Between July and December 2023, the resident contacted the landlord, asking it to reply to her complaint. The landlord did not reply until it spoke to her on 18 December 2023. It agreed to send its stage 2 complaint response.
The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident regarding her complaints about both damp walls and doors and windows on 5 January 2024. This was 8 months after she had escalated the complaint. The time taken to respond was far outside of its policy timescale. The landlord apologised for the delay and offered £100 compensation for its poor complaint handling.
In summary, the evidence shows the landlord did not adhere to its complaints policy when responding to the resident’s complaints. This led to a process which was unclear and more difficult to navigate than it should have been. The landlord replied twice at stage 1 for one of the resident’s complaints and significantly delayed its stage 2 response. The £110 redress offered during its complaints process was not sufficient to compensate for the distress and inconvenience caused by these failings.
These failings, together with the failure to provide appropriate redress to put things right, lead to a determination of maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling. An order for increased compensation has been made below.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of damp walls.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s concerns about the condition of the property’s doors and windows.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Apologise to the resident for the failings identified in this report.
2. Pay £1,025 compensation to the resident. The landlord may deduct the sum of £570 awarded as part of its internal complaints process, if already paid. The balance should be paid directly to the resident and not offset against any rent or service charge account. The compensation is broken down as follows:
  1. £550 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp walls.
  2. £250 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damaged doors and windows.
  3. £225 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s complaint handling failures.
The landlord will arrange for redecoration of the communal walls. If during those works the landlord identifies further repairs or an inspection for damp are required, it will arrange for a suitably qualified surveyor to inspect them and produce a schedule of works for any repairs identified. If it is established further repairs to the walls are required, the landlord will arrange to commence those works within 4 weeks of the date of the survey. The landlord will provide evidence that the redecoration has been completed, or a copy of the schedule of works as evidence of compliance.
Due to the conflicting information given at both stage 1 and stage 2, and the resident’s reports there has been water ingress through the doors and windows, the landlord will bring forward its planned inspection of the windows and doors for 2025. The landlord will instruct a suitably qualified independent surveyor to ascertain if the windows and doors need to be painted. Any required works must commence within 4 weeks of the survey.
The landlord should provide us with evidence of compliance with the above orders within 4 weeks.

Recommendation

If the resident reports the presence of damp in the communal areas following the landlord’s redecoration, she should be signposted to start a new complaint through the landlord’s complaint process.