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

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) (202326538)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202326538

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

9 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of parking allocation at the development.

Background

  1. The resident is a shared ownership leaseholder of the property, a 2-bedroom flat in a new build block.
  2. On 31 July 2021 the resident reserved her property. She moved into the property in September 2022. Prior to moving in, the resident had queried the parking situation with the landlord. She was informed that no parking was available to rent or purchase on the development.
  3. The resident made a formal complaint to the landlord on 12 December 2022. She said she had recently found out that another resident of the block had been offered a parking space and this was unfair.
  4. On 31 January 2023 the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. It apologised for the issues the resident experienced and said:
    1. At the time of the resident reserving her property there was no parking spaces available for sale.
    2. In November 2021, a number of spaces became available which were then sold to other leaseholders.
    3. It was unable to offer the resident a parking space within the development.
  5. The resident remained dissatisfied and brought the complaint to us.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. In her correspondence with us, the resident has raised matters that have not yet been through the landlord’s complaint process. In the interest of fairness, the scope of this investigation is limited to matters which completed the landlord’s internal complaints procedure on 31 January 2023. This is because the landlord needs to be given a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to any reported dissatisfaction with its actions before the involvement us.

Parking

  1. The resident’s property forms part of a new housing development owned by the landlord. The properties within the block were initially marketed without parking spaces.
  2. The resident reserved her property on 31 July 2021. She signed a reservation form that contained a disclaimer that the resident would not be able to park within the development. The form shows the resident agreed to purchase the property on these terms. This is not disputed by either party. The resident’s lease was drawn up on 16 September 2021.
  3. The resident has told us that at the time of making the reservation, she was informed of the upcoming construction of a nearby train station. She was told this would provide substitute parking. The resident said this information “heavily influenced” her decision to proceed with the purchase. She also she was made aware the plans for the train station had been abandoned after she paid her reservation fee on 13 August 2021.
  4. The landlord cannot be held responsible for any lack of substitute parking it had no control over. The information given to the resident at the time of reserving the property was correct and appropriate.
  5. In November 2021 the landlord was able to offer a limited number of parking spaces at the development. These were sold to buyers reserving their properties between November 2021 and January 2022. The landlord has a parking allocation policy. However, this refers to the issuing of parking permits rather than the sale of parking spaces.
  6. In May 2022, the resident queried the parking situation with the landlord. In an email dated 20 May 2022 the landlord confirmed there was no parking available to rent or purchase. The information given was correct at that time and appropriate.
  7. Following completion of the sale in September 2022 the resident became aware that another resident of the block had been able to purchase a parking space. She subsequently complained to the landlord on 12 December 2022.
  8. In its stage 1 complaint response dated 28 December 2022, the landlord explained that parking spaces had only become available after the resident had reserved the property and the lease had been drawn up. It provided the resident with advice on how to apply to the local authority for a permit and the criteria she would need to evidence.
  9. The resident escalated her complaint on 26 January 2023 and said she wanted to be given the same opportunity to buy a parking space as others in her block. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 31 January 2023. It confirmed it was unable to offer her a parking space and reiterated the resident had agreed to purchase the property without parking.
  10. There is no evidence the resident made repeated requests for a parking space during her purchase. While it is unfortunate the resident was unable to purchase a parking space, at the point of reservation and in the landlord’s email in May 2022, the resident was correctly informed there were no parking spaces available for purchase. The resident accepted this and continued with the purchase on the basis she would not have parking at the development.
  11. The evidence in the case shows the landlord acted reasonably and in accordance with its policies in how it handled the resident’s complaint. This leads to a finding of no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of parking allocation at the development.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of parking allocation at the development.

Orders and recommendations

  1. There are no orders or recommendations for the landlord to consider.