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

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) (202232477)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202232477

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

4 July 2024


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:
    1. Repairs to the bathroom.
    2. Reports of damp and mould in the bathroom.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident has occupied the property, a 2 bedroom, 2 storey maisonette, on an assured tenancy since 1999.
  2. A repair was raised on 6 January 2022 as the resident reported that tiles had fallen off the bathroom wall. The landlord sent a plumber on 1 February 2022, who reported back that an asbestos test would be needed first. They also noted that, although there was a shower fitting on the bathroom taps, they had advised the resident to only have baths as there were not sufficient tiles or a shower curtain. Although an asbestos test was completed, the landlord failed to arrange for the bathroom tiles to be replaced at that time.

Summary of events

  1. The resident again reported that bathroom tiles had fallen off the wall on 29 November 2022. The landlord’s maintenance team attended, although it is not clear when. Having provided a quote for work to be done on 5 January 2023, the maintenance team told the landlord on 3 February 2023, that if it repaired the tiles they would likely fall off. It recommended tiling the whole area to the ceiling, the windowsill, changing the bath panel, fitting a shower screen and repairing a wall.
  2. The landlord told the maintenance team on 8 March 2023 that the shower screen and further tiling would be the resident’s responsibility. It agreed for the maintenance team to replace the taps and complete the repairs it was responsible for. However, the resident rejected that and made a complaint verbally on 10 March 2023 about there being damp and mould in the bathroom and repairs being needed.
  3. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 13 March 2023. It said the area surveyor had confirmed it was the resident’s responsibility to tile up to the ceiling and fit a shower screen as it had not installed the shower fitting on the taps. Therefore, it would approve retiling up to the windowsill only. It provided the resident with its booklet “residents repairs and responsibilities’ for reference. It noted the resident had refused repairs including changing the bath taps so it was going to speak with the surveyor to see if she could have a shower (as she had mentioned she had a back issue) and it would get back to her.
  4. On 15 March 2023, the landlord confirmed that the area surveyor and its Head of Maintenance had both advised that if the resident required tiling to the ceiling, it was her responsibility. The shower could stay but she would need to install a shower curtain or screen. It would ask the maintenance team to return to complete the work to the splash back, bath panel and windowsill.
  5. The resident asked to escalate her complaint to stage 2 on 3 April 2023, which the landlord acknowledged the same day.
  6. The maintenance team closed the job on 19 April 2023 as the resident had declined repairs.
  7. Following the Ombudsman’s intervention the landlord acknowledged, on 3 July 2023, that the complaint had been escalated, and then issued its stage 2 response on 7 July 2023. The same day, the resident reported damp and mould in the bathroom again. The landlord apologised for the delayed stage 2 response, due to a backlog and internal changes, and awarded £30 compensation (£10 per month x 3 month delay).
  8. The landlord went on to say that its response at stage 1 had been correct as it would only replace the tiles for the bath splashback. As the resident had declined to have the shower attachment removed, if she continued to use the attachment as a shower, she would need to complete the tiling work and fit a shower screen/curtain. However, as a gesture of goodwill, it had liaised with the surveyor to see if it could do the work. The surveyor had availability to attend on 11 July 2023 to assess the situation, if she agreed to it.
  9. The landlord went on to say that, although the resident had said she had a bad back, it had no health issues recorded for her. It therefore asked her to complete a Person-Centred Risk Assessment (PCRA) so it could provide a more tailored service and amend repair times accordingly. It explained its Customer Service Advisor had offered to book in a damp repair but the resident had declined this. However, at stage 1, it accepted it could have offered to arrange further damp work separate to the works needed relating to the shower. It had now contacted its damp and mould specialist which would attend and complete a clean and shield of any affected areas. It would also report back any repairs needed to prevent further damp issues. It awarded £80 compensation for not addressing this point at stage 1 (£20 per month x 4 months since the complaint was raised).
  10. The landlord accepted it had not carried out follow on works after the asbestos test in 2022 so awarded £90 compensation (£10 per month x 9 months) for that delay. Therefore, £200 compensation was offered overall.
  11. The resident explained that she was not available on 11 July 2023 and the surveyor visit was rearranged. In the meantime, the landlord arranged for the compensation to be paid.
  12. A Healthy Homes Report was produced on 4 August 2023 which reported damp in the bathroom and other issues which do not form part of this complaint. A clean and shield was done the same day. On 9 August 2023 the landlord created a job to address the issue of front wall tiles in the bathroom having come off, as it was allowing water to ingress causing moisture damage to the wall. It noted the wall would require plastering and tiling.
  13. The landlord chased the surveyor in August and September 2023, to establish what decision it had made about the bathroom repairs following the visit, but the surveyor was not available. The landlord was told on 6 September 2023 by somebody that had also attended the same day as the surveyor, that it concluded the landlord was not responsible for fully tiling round the bath. It updated the resident the same day and asked her if that correlated with her understanding.
  14. The landlord chased the resident for a response on 13 September 2023. It again explained that the surveyor was off work, but it understood they had said if the resident obtained some items it could install them. It would tile around the bath, not to the ceiling, but asked her to confirm this was also her understanding so it could arrange the work.
  15. The resident responded the following day and asked the landlord to provide a date in the next 14 days when the repairs would be carried out. She confirmed the mould had been addressed in August 2023 and felt her request (to have the bathroom fully tiled around the bath) was reasonable due to the length of time she had waited and as she had back issues.
  16. The resident then instigated a claim against the landlord which was settled by the resident accepting a Part 36 offer on 27 February 2024, whereby the landlord has to complete a number of works (including bathroom repairs and damp and mould) works and pay her £2,100.

Assessment and findings

Repairs to the bathroom

  1. The tenancy agreement says the landlord is responsible for repairing bathroom fittings such as basins, baths and pipes. It is also says it is responsible for keeping in good repair internal walls, but that does not include painting and decoration (which would be the resident’s responsibility).
  2. The landlord also publishes a booklet called ‘Your home and your maintenance responsibilities as a tenant’ which was sent to the resident. This says it would repair showers it had installed but the resident was responsible for splash back tiles and seals. Its Repairs policy provides further information, and says it is responsible for repairing bathroom tiles and that it aims to complete routine day to day repairs in an average of 25 calendar days.
  3. The resident has a shower fitment on the bath which was not fitted by the landlord. The bath is only partially tiled which means the walls around the bath above the tiles have been getting wet when the shower is used, resulting in damp and mould. In addition, several of the existing tiles have come away.
  4. The landlord accepted the resident had first reported an issue with the tiles in January 2022 and it had not carried out follow on works after an asbestos test at that time. It therefore awarded the resident £90 compensation for that delay, which was appropriate to recognise the frustration caused to the resident. When the issue was raised again in November 2022, the landlord offered to replace the tap fitting that it was responsible for, so it complied with its obligations, but this was not what the resident wanted. As the landlord did not fit the shower, it was not obliged to do the additional tiling or fit a shower screen which were needed so the resident could use the shower without causing damage to the walls.
  5. However, the landlord did note the resident reported she was having back problems so preferred to have a shower. As it had no record of this, it rightly asked her to complete a PCRA so it could establish whether it needed to make adaptions/alter its approach to accommodate her needs. It is not known if the resident did complete and submit this form.
  6. There is no evidence the resident had to chase for information during the period of delay in 2022, although there was a further 2 month delay when the landlord struggled to obtain information from the surveyor after a visit and take action. These delays amount to service failure, although the actual effect on the resident was limited.
  7. In the Ombudsman’s view, as the landlord’s offer to pay £90 compensation did not take in to account a further 2 month delay later, compensation of £150 would be more reasonable in the circumstances. However, the resident has since reached an agreement with the landlord by way of a Part 36 offer, whereby the landlord has agreed to carry out a number of repairs, including the bathroom, and pay the resident considerable compensation which far exceeds the amount this Service would order as a remedy.
  8. It is not for the Ombudsman to go behind the details of the Part 36 offer, nor would it be fair and reasonable to order compensation for an issue that has now been settled, as that would mean the resident was having two bites at the same cherry. The initial offer of compensation from the landlord did not sufficiently remedy this part of the complaint, which is why there has been a finding of service failure. However, as a Part 36 offer has since been made and accepted, no order is made in that regard. Instead the Ombudsman recommends the landlord adhere to paying the resident the compensation set out in the Part 36 agreement in order to resolve this issue.

Reports of damp and mould in the bathroom.

  1. This Service’s Spotlight on Damp and Mould report, it’s not lifestyle (October 2021) says landlords should adopt a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould interventions and ensure that responses to such reports are timely and reflect the urgency of the issue. The landlord has provided evidence that it had put together an action plan as a result of this, which is positive to see.
  2. The landlord’s Damp and Mould policy says, in the event of a report, it will establish if an immediate repair is needed by assessing the property within 20 working days. Remedial works would then be allocated to the maintenance team within 10 working days of assessment. The resident first mentioned damp and mould on 10 March 2023, as it was caused by walls getting wet by the shower due to a lack of tiling. However, the landlord did not address it as the resident did not agree to it only doing limited repairs.
  3. While the Ombudsman understands the landlord was in a difficult situation, it later accepted that it could have done more. Irrespective of whether an agreement could be reached about who was responsible for the tiling, it could have offered to arrange for a damp and mould specialist to attend and complete a clean and shield of any affected areas, in any event.
  4. A damp and mould treatment was carried out on 4 August 2023, after it was offered by the landlord in July 2023, and this indicates that had it offered to arrange this in March 2023, it could have been done by April 2023. Therefore, there was a 4 month delay in the landlord taking steps to address the damp and mould which amounts to maladministration. The landlord acknowledged this in its complaint response and offered £80 compensation.
  5. The Ombudsman appreciates that the landlord attempted to resolve the complaint with this offer, but the level of compensation offered is not in line with this Service’s remedies guidance. The guidance states that maladministration that has adversely affected a resident (as it did here, as she had to live with damp and mould for 4 months unnecessarily), but where an attempt to put things right has been made, should be compensated with a payment of between £100 and £600. As such compensation of £200 would be more appropriate.
  6. As the initial offer of compensation from the landlord did not sufficiently remedy this part of the complaint, there has been a finding of maladministration. However, as explained earlier, a Part 36 offer has since been made and accepted, so no order is made in that regard. Instead the Ombudsman recommends the landlord adhere to paying the resident the compensation set out in the Part 36 agreement in order to resolve this issue.

Landlord’s complaint handling.

  1. The landlord issued its stage 1 response 3 days after the complaint was made and addressed the issues raised; therefore, complying with its Complaints policy. However, the resident asked for her complaint to be escalated to stage 2 on 3 April 2023 and, despite acknowledging that on the same day, the landlord failed to provide a response within 20 working days, as per its Complaints policy. It was only following this Service’s intervention that the landlord was prompted to contact the resident on 3 July 2023, some 3 months later, and provided its stage 2 response 4 days later. This delay amounts to service failure.
  2. To recognise this delay, the landlord awarded the resident £30 compensation. Again, although the Ombudsman appreciates that compensation was offered in an effort to put things right, it does not sufficiently recognise the impact. The landlord tried to make amends but the resident was inconvenienced by having to refer the complaint to this Service before getting a stage 2 response which inevitably contributed to her frustration.
  3. The landlord failed to manage the resident’s expectations, but the detriment was limited and relatively short-lived. Therefore, compensation of £150 would be reasonable in this case and an order to reflect that, has been made.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in relation to the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
    1. Reports of repairs needed to the bathroom.
    2. Formal complaint.
  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the bathroom.

Reasons

  1. There were delays addressing the tile repairs needed after the asbestos report was done, and a further 2 month delay obtaining feedback from its surveyor.
  2. There was a 3 month delay in the landlord addressing the complaint at stage 2.
  3. The landlord failed to offer to treat the damp and mould promptly once it was reported, which resulted in a 4 month delay in action being taken.

Orders and recommendations

  1. Orders
    1. Within four weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
      1. Apologise to the resident for the failings identified by this investigation.
      2. Pay the resident £150 compensation to recognise the impact of the delay in its complaint handling.

Recommendation

  1. The landlord to comply with the terms of the Part 36 agreement, which was to pay the resident £2,100 compensation and carry out the repairs agreed as per the associated Schedule of Works.