London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202422280)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202422280

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

1 August 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 reports about:
1. the condition of her home at the time of mutual exchange, and associated repairs.
2. the associated complaint.

Background

The resident lives in a 3-bed house with her 3 children. The landlord is aware that some of her children are neurodivergent. She holds an assured tenancy dated 19 August 2024 and was assigned via a mutual exchange. The landlord is a housing association.
The resident moved into the property on 19 August 2024. She reported that there were issues with back surges and blockages in the plumbing and she arranged for a plumber to fix the issues. She reported that the landlord told her she could not report repairs for 6 months after the mutual exchange. On 22 August 2024 the resident reported damp and mould in the bathroom and a potential leak from the loft. She said that a fire door in the living room was present when she viewed the property but was no longer there.
The resident made a stage 1 complaint on 28 August 2024. She said there were back surge blockages in the sinks, pipes and baths which had leaked down through the ceiling. She said:
1. the back surge water had impacted her access to washing and drinking water.
2. she had paid for a plumber as the landlord had refused to help.
3. a pipe outside the back garden was leaking into the garden area.
4. there was mould on the bathroom ceiling.
5. the property was missing 3 fire doors.
6. these issues were not visible at the viewing. She had been told the fire doors would be fitted and the kitchen cupboards would be replaced.
7. she wanted a copy of the landlord’s pre-exchange surveyors report and wanted to know how the house had passed tests.
The landlord gave a stage 1 response on 30 August 2024. It said it did not have any recent reports of repairs and gave details on how to report these. It said if residents decided to undertake repairs without permission, then it became the responsibility of the resident. The landlord noted that the resident had said she was told repairs could not be reported for 6 months after moving into the property. It said it would ask her housing officer for clarity on its repairs policy. It said the housing officer would contact her directly.
Several repairs were reported by the resident on 30 August and between 2 and 5 September 2024. She requested that the complaint be escalated on 9 September 2024. She reported the same issues as in her stage 1 complaint and said she was in financial difficulty due to paying for a new toilet, bathroom sink and shower, for damp to be treated and for the pipe blockages to be fixed.
The landlord gave a stage 2 response on 3 October 2024. It said that it would not pay for works carried out at the resident’s arrangement. It said that the resident had signed a disclaimer document when she had taken the property. This stated that she accepted the condition of the property as seen and that any repairs needed to be agreed prior to the exchange.
The resident contacted this Service as she was unhappy with the landlord’s response. She believed the landlord was responsible for the repairs she had paid for and wanted to be reimbursed for these.

Assessment and findings

The mutual exchange and associated repairs

The landlord’s mutual exchange policy says it will ensure the property is well maintained and safe for the incoming tenant by:
1. agreeing to any repairs that need completing prior to the exchange.
2. rectifying any damage or unapproved alterations and recharging the costs to the outgoing tenant.
3. undertaking any appropriate health and safety checks.
The landlord’s repairs policy says it is the resident’s responsibility:
1. to do minor repairs or replacements. These are repairs that require no technical ability and use common household tools.
2. to manage sink blockages in the kitchen and tighten and re-attach hinges or drawer fronts.
3. to manage sink, toilet, bath and shower blockages in the bathroom.
4. to manage drain and wastepipe blockages.
5. to redecorate the inside of the home.
6. to report repairs promptly.
The landlord’s repairs policy says it is responsible for:
1. water leaks, kitchen sinks, taps and the water supply.
2. leaking pipework and any drains that are not the responsibility of the water company.
3. kitchen fire doors.
The landlord’s repairs policy says it will complete:
1. routine repairs within 25 calendar days.
2. emergency repairs where there is an immediate danger within 24 hours.
The Ombudsman’s spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management (KIM is available on our website. This further highlights the need for effective record keeping with recommendations which include:
1. a minimum standard for key data recording, to ensure quality records are available to support the wider business processes.
2. ensuring that the landlord can easily interrogate databases, and that data can be extracted when needed.
On the day of her mutual exchange, the resident signed a document stating that she accepted the condition of the property as seen.
The landlord says that the resident was given the opportunity to note repairs in her visits to the property prior to moving in on 19 August 2024. This Service asked to see evidence of the viewings prior to the mutual exchange taking place and any opportunity given for repairs to be noted. The landlord did not provide information regarding visits prior to 19 August 2024. We cannot therefore assess if the landlord acted reasonably by allowing the resident an opportunity to note repairs in the property prior to the mutual exchange.
The resident complained that she did not think health and safety checks took place before the mutual exchange. The landlord’s policy says that it undertakes appropriate health and safety checks to ensure the property is well maintained. The landlord has not shown that it considered which health and safety checks may be needed. This was a failing when assessed against the landlord’s policies.
The landlord provided a sign-up checklist dated 19 August 2024. This was partially completed. It marked that ‘moving in cards’ and 3 sets of keys were given to the resident. The following key documents were left blank and there is no evidence they were shared with the resident:
1. the landlord’s repair responsibility
2. ‘how to order repairs’
3. ‘alterations’
4. ‘resident repair responsibility’.
According to the sign-up checklist, the landlord did not clearly explain repair responsibilities to the resident on 19 August 2024 and did not provide her with written documents explaining this. This was a failure to proactively manage its relationship with the resident and to ensure that she understood the landlord’s policies and procedures.
The landlord has not shown that it gave the resident an opportunity to agree repairs prior to her exchanging, as per its policy. It did not provide her with a copy of the repairs policy and procedure when she moved in. These were failings when assessed against the sign-up checklist.
The resident said that she had been told the kitchen cupboards would be replaced. It is not possible to assess this from the records provided. Had the landlord followed the recommendations set out in the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management, this failure may have been prevented.
Between 22 August and 28 August 2024, according to the landlord’s repair log, the resident reported issues with a potential leak from the loft, damp and mould in the bathroom, missing fire doors and the stair treads. In its stage 1 response on 30 August 2024 the landlord stated that it did not have any recent reports of repairs. This is a record keeping failure and indicates that the repairs records were not easily accessible to the complaint teams. It is unclear how or to whom the resident reported these issues.
The resident said in her stage 1 complaint on 28 August 2024 that the landlord had told her she could not report repairs for 6 months. The landlord said it would confirm this with the housing officer, who would contact her directly to confirm how and when she could report repairs. The landlord did not follow this proposed solution through. This was unreasonable, given it had agreed to take this action in its complaint response.
The resident asked for a surveyor’s report in her complaint and asked how the house had passed tests. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to respond directly to this and how it had considered which health and safety checks may be appropriate prior to her mutual exchange. This was a missed opportunity to clarify its position.
The resident has also reported that she was verbally told she could not report repairs for 6 months after moving in. The resident signed the document stating she accepted the property as seen. It is unclear the aim of this document, as the landlord accepted repair reports made from 22 August 2024.
On 30 August 2024, the complaints team directed the resident to the repairs policy. In its stage 1 response it stated the housing officer would be in touch directly to confirm its position. It did not follow this proposed solution to its completion, and this contributed to the resident’s confusion. It was a failure when assessed against the complaints policy.
The landlord’s internal correspondence showed a lack of clarity about the responsibility for repairs. A clear policy or published guidelines on landlord and resident responsibilities, with regards to repairs identified by mutual exchange, would have allowed the landlord to resolve the complaint more effectively.
The resident reported an issue with the stair treads on 28 August 2024. This was marked as a priority as there was a risk to health and safety. The landlord marked this as complete on 9 September 2024. The landlord was on notice to undertake an emergency repair within in 24 hours. There was a delay of 12 working days when assessed against its repairs policy. This was unreasonable in the circumstances.
Between 2 and 26 September 2024, the landlord completed multiple repairs to damp and mould, a potential leak from loft, the outside pipe, a leak behind the kitchen sink and an emergency repair to an electric wire within its repairs policy timeframe. It also conducted a CCTV drainage survey. Evidence shows that it discussed these actions with the resident. These repair actions were reasonable when assessed against its repairs policy.
Between 22 August and 13 November 2024, the resident reported multiple times that doors which were present when she viewed the property had been removed. She believed this was a fire risk which had the potential to be an immediate danger. The landlord did not respond to this aspect of her complaint, and this was a failure when assessed against its repair policy.
There is limited evidence to show what was discussed at visits prior to the mutual exchange or at the day of move in. It is therefore difficult to assess if the landlord was aware of the issues prior to 22 August 2024, when the resident’s reports are first recorded. The tenancy agreement states that the landlord is responsible for carrying out repairs within a reasonable time of being notified.
In her stage 1 and 2 complaints, the resident stated that she had paid for a new toilet, bathroom sink and shower to be fitted, for the damp in the bathroom to be treated and for the pipe blockages to be fixed. The landlord explained that if resident decided to undertake repairs without permission, then it became the responsibility of the resident.
It would have been reasonable for the resident to contact the landlord to confirm its policy, prior to her directly ordering repair works and incurring costs in August 2024. This would have allowed the landlord a fair opportunity to respond to her reports of repair issues before incurring the costs.
Once the resident notified the landlord about the costs she had incurred, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to respond to the resident’s request, with reference to the tenancy agreement and its repairs and mutual exchange policies. This would have allowed her to better understand the landlord’s repair responsibilities and any relevant policies or procedures.
In summary, once the resident began to report issues on 22 August 2024, the landlord completed most repairs within its policy timeframe. However, we have found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports about the condition of her home at the time of mutual exchange and repairs needed. This is because of:
1. its poor record keeping in relation to the resident’s visits prior to her mutual exchange date.
2. its failure to provide the resident with copies of relevant repairs policies and procedures on the resident’s mutual exchange date.
3. its failure to consider if health and safety checks may be appropriate before the resident’s mutual exchange date.
4. the housing officer did not contact the resident directly as proposed in the stage 1 response.
5. its 12-day delay in responding to the resident’s reports of damaged stair treads.
6. its failure to respond to the resident’s complaint about the lack of fire doors in the home.
The resident has said she was distressed by the confusion and that she made decisions based on the information available to her at the time. The resident began to report issues 3 days after she moved in, and the landlord directed her to its repairs policy on 30 August 2024.
In line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, we have ordered £350 compensation for the likely distress caused by the landlord’s failures identified above. We have made an order to review its mutual exchange and repairs policies to clarify how and when mutual exchange residents can report repairs. We have also ordered that the landlord assess the resident’s internal doors and carry out works in line with its repairs policy.

Complaint handling

The landlord’s policy stated stage 1 complaints would be acknowledged within 5 working days and a response within 10 working days of logging the complaint. Stage 2 complaints would be acknowledged within 5 working days and a final written response provided within 20 working days.
The resident made a stage 1 complaint on 28 August 2024. The landlord responded 2 days later on 30 August 2024.
The resident escalated the complaint on 9 September 2024. The landlord acknowledged and responded within its policy timeframe.
The landlord responded to the resident’s complaint within the timescales set out in its complaints policy. However, it did not respond to the resident’s complaint about the fire doors; therefore we have found service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaints. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident £50 for the likely distress caused by its failure to respond to all issues raised in the resident’s complaint.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports about the condition of her home at the time of mutual exchange and associated repairs.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders

Within 28 days of this report, the landlord should:
1. apologise to the resident for the failures identified in this report.
2. pay the resident £400 compensation, this is made up of:
  1. £350 compensation for the likely distress caused by the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports about the condition of her home at the time of mutual exchange and associated repairs.
  2. £50 for the likely distress caused by its failure to respond to all issues raised in the resident’s complaint.
3. review its mutual exchange and repairs policies to clarify how and when mutual exchange residents can report repairs.
4. respond to the resident’s reports of missing internal doors and carry out any necessary works in line with its repairs policy.
5. share documentary evidence of the above with this Service.