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

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) (202300176)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202300176

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

25 April 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. reports of heating and hot water issues at the property.
    2. associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident has an assured tenancy with the landlord which is a housing association. The property is a 2-bedroom flat where the resident lives with her daughter.
  2. The resident reported no heating or hot water in the property to the landlord in early January 2023. The landlord raised a work order and its contractor attended on 10 January 2023. The resident raised that she had no heating and hot water again on 25 March 2023.
  3. The resident complained to the landlord on 29 March 2023. She said that she regularly has repair issues with the heating/hot water system and the appointments are always more than 5 days away. She also added that “she has a young daughter who needs to use hot water to get ready for school…”. The same day the landlord provided its stage 1 response. It said it was not able to offer an earlier appointment than 27 April 2023, but that it would attempt to bring it forward.
  4. After receiving the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response the resident said she wanted to escalate her complaint. She said that the landlord’s response was unacceptable and she should not have to wait so long to get an appointment. She also said the landlord had a duty to comply with the tenancy agreement and attend to these matters promptly.
  5. An operative of the landlord attended the property in late April 2023 to fix the heating and hot water facilities. The operative noted that follow on work was required to fully fix the issue.
  6. The landlord’s contractors attended as well as an electrician on 7 and 19 June 2023 to do electrical works and fix the immersion heater and its elements.
  7. On 7 March 2024 the landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint escalation request.
  8. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 12 March 2024. It said it had contacted the maintenance team to prioritise rescheduling the appointment and it offered compensation of £200 for the distress and inconvenience endured. In reply the resident said she was unhappy with the compensation offered as she was without hot water and heating for a whole month, said she wanted the outcome reconsidered.
  9. On 19 March 2024 the landlord said it would review the case once more and respond in the next 10 working days.
  10. When the resident approached us, she said she wanted compensation due to a delayed repair and for the landlord to allocate earlier dates for its contractors to attend to jobs.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of heating and hot water issues

  1. The tenancy agreement says that the landlord will keep in repair and in working order all fixtures and fittings for sanitation, the supply of water, gas, electricity and space and water heating. This reflects the landlord’s obligations under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
  2. The landlord’s repair policy says that there is a right to repair within 1 working day where there is “total or partial loss of space or water heating between October and 1 May” or “3 working days across 30 April to 1 November”.
  3. The landlord’s repair records do not consistently detail the completion dates for the repairs. It also does not detail how long the property was left without hot water and/or heating.
  4. The evidence indicates that the resident did not have full access to hot water and/or heating across a full month from March through April 2023, and had intermittent access from January 2023 to August 2024.
  5. The records show the landlord attended to the issue on 27 April 2023, this repair took place 34 days after the resident had raised the issue in March 2023. This was not appropriate because it is well beyond the 1 working day timeframe in the landlord’s repair policy. The landlord said in its stage 1 complaint response, the reason for the delay was because the coronavirus pandemic had led to a build up of outstanding repairs that it was still working its way through. Additionally the landlord had not labelled the repair as urgent or as a priority job in its repair logs, which we would expect where a resident is without heating or hot water. This would also be in line with the landlord’s repair policy.
  6. The landlord also said in its stage 1 and stage 2 complaint responses that it would try to bring the repair appointments forward. However, this did not take place on either occasion.
  7. In April 2023 the landlord’s operative noted there were further works required, although from the records it does not appear that this advice was acted upon until June 2023. Nor is it apparent that the April 2023 repair appointment fully resolved the heating/hot water issue, as there were subsequent repairs in June 2023, and in July/August 2024. Although the evidence suggests that the resident did have heating and hot water at these times,
  8. It is evident from the landlord’s the repair logs that there were several problems with the supply of heating/hot water, and there were unreasonable delays in attending to these. This caused inconvenience and distress to the resident where she had to attend the gym to shower and spend time outside of her home as it was too cold to be there in the winter time.
  9. The landlord’s series of failings in this case amount to maladministration. When there are failings by a landlord, our role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord (acknowledgment of failings, an apology and compensation) put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances.
  10. The landlord acted fairly in its stage 2 response by apologising and acknowledging the distress and inconvenience to the resident. It put things right by completing the repair and offering the resident £200. This sum is in line with our suggested financial redress for instances of maladministration, detailed in its published remedies guidance. There was a failure which adversely affected the resident but this did not have a permanent or lasting impact. Therefore the sum offered was proportionate. Based on the above, we find that the landlord’s offer of £200 in compensation was reasonable to put right the failings identified above. 


Associated complaint

  1. The resident raised the complaint on 29 May 2023. The same day the landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response, which is within its complaints policy timeframe of 10 working days.
  2. On 29 May 2023 the resident escalated her complaint. However the landlord did not acknowledge the stage 2 escalation request until March 2024, 10 months later or 56 working days. This was significantly outside of its 20 working day response time recorded in its complaints policy. This delay was unreasonable and exacerbated the situation further for the resident.
  3. The evidence shows that resident also had to follow up with the landlord on numerous occasions to get her complaint progressed. The resident should not have to chase the landlord in order for it to comply with the timeframes set out in the Code and its policy. It is not acceptable that, despite the clear request to escalate the complaint, the landlord did not do so and did not explain why this was the case to the resident.
  4. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 12 March 2024. Following this the landlord said over correspondence to the resident it would review the case once more within 10 working days. However, the landlord did not perform a review within this timeframe. The resident requested an update on the review after about 15 working days had elapsed with no success.
  5. Given the failures in this case, we consider there was maladministration by the landlord in its complaint handling. This is because the significant delay in acknowledging and issuing its stage 2 response, the landlord did not do what it said it would, and because it did not acknowledge these failures or provide recognition of the impact it had on the resident. The landlord is further ordered to pay the resident £125 for the stress and inconvenience caused by its complaint handling failures.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord made an offer of redress, which in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolved its handling of the resident’s reports of issues with the heating and hot water.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the complaint.


Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of this report, the landlord is ordered to provide evidence to the Ombudsman that it has:
    1. Apologised to the resident for its handling of the associated complaint.
    2. Paid directly to the resident £125 compensation in recognition of the stress and inconvenience caused by its poor handling of the associated complaint.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord pay the resident the £200 in compensation, if it has not already done so, that it offered in its stage 2 complaint response. The reasonable redress finding is made on the basis of this sum being paid to the resident, as it recognised elements of service failure by the landlord.