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

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) (202319900)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202319900

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

15 May 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 leaks, damaged flooring, damp, and mould in the property.
    2. Associated formal complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of a 4-bedroom house owned by the landlord, which is a housing association.
  2. The resident first reported leaks, damage to her flooring, damp, and mould in the property in September 2020. She raised further reports about these issues in 2021 and 2022. On 18 October 2022, she made a formal complaint about the landlord’s failure to fix the leaks, repair her flooring, resolve the damp, and mould issues in the property.
  3. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 19 October 2022. It said it attended the property on 22 March 2022 and booked follow on works which it had not completed. It apologised for its poor service. It scheduled repair jobs for the leaks and flooring on 24 October and 16 November 2022, respectively.
  4. The resident continued to correspond with the landlord about her complaint between November 2022 and June 2023. On 12 June 2023, it offered her £720 compensation for distress and inconvenience caused by its failure to complete the repairs.
  5. On 1 December 2023, the resident requested escalation of her complaint to stage 2 of the landlord’s process. She asked it to resolve the damp and mould issues, replace her damaged flooring with like–for–like flooring and resolve other outstanding associated repairs.
  6. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 2 January 2024. It stated that it had completed all the repairs on 17 January 2023. It informed the resident that it was her responsibility to replace her flooring. It raised a new job for a damp and mould inspection. It apologised for the delays in resolving the issues. It offered £100 decoration voucher and increased compensation of £940.
  7. The resident remained unhappy with the landlord’s response and escalated her complaint to us. She wants the landlord to replace her damaged flooring and offer her increased compensation.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. In communication with this Service, the resident said this situation had a detrimental impact on her health. The courts are the most effective place for disputes about personal injury and illness. This is largely because independent medical experts are appointed to give evidence. They have a duty to the court to provide unbiased insights on the diagnosis, prognosis, and cause of any illness or injury. When disputes arise over the cause of an injury, oral testimony can be examined in court. While the Ombudsman cannot consider the effect on health, consideration has been given to any general distress and inconvenience which the resident experienced because of any service failure by the landlord.
  2. The resident stated that she has reported ongoing issues with leaks, damaged flooring, damp, and mould, since 2020. The Ombudsman encourages residents to raise complaints with their landlord in a timely manner, which is normally within 12 months of the issue arising. This is so the landlord has a reasonable opportunity to investigate the issue while it is still ‘live’ and sufficient evidence is available to reach an informed conclusion. As issues become historical it is increasingly difficult for either the landlord, or an independent body such as an Ombudsman to conduct an effective review of the actions taken.
  3. In view of the time periods involved in this case, considering the availability and reliability of evidence, this assessment does not consider any specific events prior to 18 October 2021. This is 12 months prior to the resident’s complaint to the landlord and any reference made to events prior to this date is for context only.
  4. The Ombudsman may not investigate complaints which have not completed the landlord’s internal complaints process. When the resident escalated her complaint to stage 2, she complained about new issues in relation to disposal of old doors left in the property, repairs to archway and wiring trunking. This complaint has not yet exhausted the landlord’s complaints process, as such we will not consider it in this report. However, we have considered the issue within the assessment of the landlord’s complaint handling.

Reports of leaks, damaged flooring, damp, and mould in the property.

  1. The landlord’s records show it raised a job to investigate flooring damage due to leaks on 2 December 2021. It completed an inspection on 22 March 2022 and recommended a follow up appointment. According to its repair records the resident contacted it on 28 July 2022, stating she had been waiting for an appointment with the damp and mould contractors but they had not attended the property. It attended the property on 10 August 2022 and completed a full clean and shield of the entire area.
  2. The landlord’s repairs policy states that it is responsible for repairing leaks in the property and will complete emergency leak repairs within 24 hours, non-emergency leak repairs and other routine repairs within 25 calendar days. Its damp and mould policy states, upon receiving reports of damp and mould, it will assess the situation within 20 working days to determine if immediate repairs are needed. This assessment will identify the cause of the issues and provide management guidance. It will record any required repairs and assign to maintenance teams within 10 working days. It will communicate timelines clearly and keep residents informed throughout the process.
  3. The landlord’s records show the landlord had not resolved the issues with the leaks, flooring and damp and mould by 10 August 2022. This was more than 8 months after it raised the repair on 2 December 2021. Furthermore, it is unclear from its records if it identified the root cause of the damp and mould and provided a management guidance. There was also a lack of communication or explanation for this extended delay. This was a failing and not in line with its relevant polices.
  4. The resident made a formal complaint on 18 August 2022. She reported she had been having problems with leaks in the property since September 2020. The leaks caused damage to her floors, walls, damp, and mould. It had made numerous attempts to fix the leaks, but the issues persisted. She wanted the landlord to resolve the issues and offer compensation.
  5. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 19 October 2022. It upheld the complaint and apologised for the delays in completing the repairs. it said:
    1. Following previous leaks in the property, its damp and mould contractors attended and recommended follow-on works. It raised a job on 2 December 2021 to investigate the flooring issues. It attended on 22 March 2022.
    2. Following its visit on 22 March 2022 it recommended a supervisor inspection to fully assess what works it needed to complete in the property. It attended this inspection on 11 October 2022, it raised works to remove the flooring, check the sub floor and fix the leaks.
    3. It attended on 17 October 2022 to fix an uncontainable leak in the property. It confirmed it had to complete further investigation and follow on works. It booked the leaks repair for 24 October 2022 and flooring repairs for 16 November 2022.
    4. It said it would offer compensation after it had completed the repairs.
  6. According to the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response, it raised a repair job to attend the leak and flooring issues on 2 December 2021. However, it did not attend this initial appointment until 22 March 2022. This was more than 3 months from when it raised the repair. Furthermore, there was no communication with the resident explaining this delay. This was a failing and not in line with its repairs policy. After it attended on 22 March 2022, it scheduled a further appointment for 11 October 2022. More than 6 months from when it attended in March 2022, again it did not offer any explanation for this long delay. This lack of communication from the landlord would have led the resident to believe it was not taking her complaint seriously thereby causing unnecessary distress and inconvenience.
  7. In its stage 1 complaint response, it was appropriate of the landlord to acknowledge the lengthy delays in completing the resident’s repairs. However, it should also have acknowledged its poor communication and offered compensation which it could have reviewed after it completed the repairs.
  8. The landlord’s records show it did not complete the leak repairs until 24 October 2022, more than 10 months from when it raised the first repair in December 2021. This was a significant length of time and as earlier stated its communication regarding this was poor. The landlord failed to act in line with its repairs policy.
  9. On 27 October 2022, the landlord informed the resident it scheduled repairs for the bathroom and hallway flooring and subflooring on 16 November 2022. It explained that the first appointment would be an inspection, with further work arranged later if needed. It provided contact details for the customer liaison officer for any questions about the job.
  10. The resident contacted the landlord on 31 October 2022, requesting clarity around the term ‘subflooring’ specifically, she asked if the subflooring repairs meant it would fix the damage caused to the flooring in her living room. She asked if it would replace her living room her flooring. She raised concerns around her walls being damp.
  11. The landlord’s repairs policy states it is responsible for subflooring repairs in all rooms and maintaining floor coverings in kitchens and bathrooms only. The resident is responsible for maintaining floor coverings in other parts of the property.
  12. On 1 November 2022, the landlord clarified subflooring means the layer beneath visible flooring. It explained some properties had floor coverings like laminate, tiles, or carpets which covered the subflooring. It said its repairs policy is to fix damaged subflooring in all rooms but only repair floor coverings in the bathroom and kitchen. It said it would confirm its position in relation to her damaged flooring and assess required works during its inspection on 16 November 2022.
  13. It was reasonable of the landlord to explain its policy in relation to replacing the resident’s living room flooring. However, it should have explained its position earlier to manage the resident’s expectation in terms of what flooring it would provide. Also, it should have provided its insurer’s details and informed her how to claim for the damaged flooring via its insurer’s. It failed to do this.
  14. The landlord completed the overhaul of the ground floor toilet and plumbing on 16 November 2022. It confirmed responsibility for the floor covering only in the resident’s bathroom and kitchen, while the resident was responsible for all other rooms. It booked an appointment for 25 November 2022 to assess the flooring and subflooring requirements, but it rescheduled this to 13 January 2023.
  15. The landlord clarified its policy regarding flooring and subflooring, but it failed to inform the resident about the specific repairs in progress. Given the long wait for these repairs, it should have ensured prompt attendance, as the delay caused unnecessary distress for the resident. Additionally, it did not address the resident’s concerns about her damp walls.
  16. The landlord’s records showed it completed a full flooring renewal in the resident’s downstairs toilet on 13 January 2023. On 18 January 2023, it informed her that it raised new works to fix the hallway wall for 21 March 2023. It scheduled a follow-up repair appointment for 21 March 2023 to replaster the water-damaged hallway walls. It initially offered £70 in compensation, but it later increased the offer to £500 on 8 March 2023. It stated that its records indicated its contractors had resolved the leaks, damp, and mould issues. It provided its insurer details for the resident to claim for her damaged personal items.
  17. The resident remained unhappy with the landlord’s response to her repair requests. She made a new complaint on 17 March 2023, reporting damage to the flooring in the entrance hallway and living room from the leak in the downstairs toilet. She requested it complete repairs to her flooring and walls.
  18. The landlord reopened the resident’s previous stage 1 complaint and explained that it had not completed the scheduled wall plastering on 21 March 2023 due to the need for an asbestos test. Its contractors had made several unsuccessful attempts to contact the resident regarding booking an appointment for the test. It asked her to contact the contractors directly to book the test. The landlord’s record show it completed the wall plastering repairs on 15 June 2023. This was more than 1 year and 6 months from when it raised repair jobs to complete the leak, damp, and mould repairs on 1 December 2021. This delay was excessively long and its communication regarding this was poor.
  19. On 26 April 2023, the landlord reiterated that it had completed the bathroom flooring work on 13 January 2023. It confirmed since the resident installed her own wooden floor covering in her hallway and living room it was not its responsibility to replace these. Additionally, it was also her responsibility to complete decorations such as painting and wall papering. It asked her to confirm if the damp areas were slowly drying or if active leaks persisted, stating it would advise on next steps once it received this information. It then inquired whether the resident wanted to escalate her complaint to stage 2 of the process.
  20. Between 10 May 2025 and 5 June 2023 there were multiple correspondence between the landlord and the resident regarding her reporting damaged items, requesting for increased compensation, and expressing dissatisfaction over the landlord’s refusal to restore her hallway and living room flooring.
  21. The landlord informed the resident on 12 June 2023 that it was unable to change its decision regarding not being responsible for restoring her floor cover. It said it had completed work to the subflooring to ensure the floor was safe but any further coverings would be her responsibility to install. It offered increased compensation of £720 for the delays and distress and inconvenience in resolving the complaint.
  22. The resident remained unhappy and asked the landlord to escalate her complaint to stage 2 on 1 December 2023. Amongst other requests she asked it to replace her flooring in the living room and upstairs hallway, to resolve the damp and mould issues. She reported mould had returned to her children’s rooms. To complete any required remedial works, repaint areas that had been poorly painted and to reimburse her for reported damaged personal items.
  23. Where there are failings by a landlord, as is the case here, this Service will consider whether the redress offered by it (including an apology and compensation) put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this, this Service considers whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with our dispute resolution principles to be fair, put things right, and learn from outcomes.
  24. In its stage 2 complaint response on 2 January 2024, the landlord apologised for the length of time it took to resolve the complaint and the distress and inconvenience the situation caused the resident. It stated:
    1. It was the resident’s responsibility to redecorate once it completed all repairs. However, it offered her £100 voucher as a good will gesture towards redecoration.
    2. It raised a new work order for its damp and mould contractors to inspect the property.
    3. It provided its insurer’s details for the resident to make a claim towards her damaged personal items.
    4. It confirmed that it was not responsible for replacing the resident’s flooring and asked her to make a liability claim to its liability insurer if she felt it was responsible.
    5. It had attempted to contact her on 22 and 27 December 2023 to get a better understanding of the outstanding issued so it could book appropriate repairs where needed.
    6. It offered increased compensation of £940, broken down as £120 distress, £120 inconvenience, and £280 for repair delays, £420 for time and effort in getting the complaint resolved.
  25. In its stage 1 and 2 complaint responses, the landlord apologised and acknowledged some service failings. Its stage 2 response shows it made reasonable attempts to put things right for the resident. It resolved the leaks and flooring issues and made plans to resolve the damp and mould issues. It records show it completed further damp and mould works, on 23 February 2024. It provided its insurance information and clarified its position in relation to its responsibility for the living room flooring repairs.
  26. In conclusion, the landlord did not complete the repairs in line with its policy time limit and there were lengthy delays and poor communication. It apologised and acknowledged the delays and its records show it has currently completed all the repairs it agreed to in its stage 2 complaint response. Furthermore, its offer of £940 compensation is in line with our remedies guidance which recommends amounts of between £600 to £1,000 where there has been a failure which had significant impact on the resident. We find the landlord’s offer of compensation, completion of works, acknowledgement of failings and apologies fully resolve the failings with respect to its handling of the residents reports of leaks, damaged flooring, damp, and mould.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy outlines that it will respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days. The landlord responded in line with its response time limit at stage 1 and stage 2 of its process.
  2. The resident raised the following new issues in her escalation request, she asked the landlord to:
    1. Remove old doors that it left in her property, repair broken fence and front and back doors.
    2. Replace missing kitchen lightening.
    3. Repair the archway between the kitchen and dining room.
    4. Repair trunking in the front room.
  3. Paragraph 6.8 of the Code states that where residents raise additional complaints during the investigation, these must be incorporated into the stage 1 response if they are related, and the stage 1 response has not been issued. Where the stage 1 response has been issued, the new issues are unrelated to the issues already being investigated or it would unreasonably delay the response, the new issues must be logged as a new complaint.
  4. In response to the old doors, broken fence and front and back doors, the landlord appropriately informed the resident that as these issues were not part of her initial complaint it would not be able to provide a formal complaint response to these issues. It advised her to raise the issue with its contact centre who would raise a work order and investigate the issues for her. Its response was reasonable and in line with the Code.
  5. In relation to the kitchen lighting the landlord asked the resident to contact it so it could get additional information to investigate the matter further. It said it had reviewed its repair records but it could not locate any jobs raised in relation to the archway between the kitchen and dining or to make good trunking wiring. It said it had been unable to contact her to discus and it would need more information to investigate. It said she should contact it so it would raise the job as required. It also clarified its position in relation to not being responsible for replacing hallway flooring.
  6. In conclusion, the landlord responded to the resident’s complaint in line with its complaints policy and the Code. There was no maladministration in its complaint handling.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made reasonable redress by offering redress to the resident which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves its handling of the resident’s reports of leaks, damaged flooring, damp, and mould in the property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s associated formal complaint.

Recommendations

  1. The Ombudsman recommends that the landlord:
    1. Pays the resident the £940 compensation it previously offered if it has not already done so.
    2. Provides the £100 decoration voucher if it has not already done so.
    3. The finding of reasonable redress for its handling of the resident’s reports of leaks, damaged flooring, damp, and mould in the property is dependent on the payment of this sum and voucher.