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

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) (202330297)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202330297

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

10 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:
    1. the resident’s concerns about the replacement of her toilet flush.
    2. the associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant under an agreement dated July 2005. She lives with her 2 adult children. The property is a 3-bedroom house. The landlord is a housing association.
  2. The landlord fitted a new toilet flush in the resident’s property on 10 October 2022. The resident called the landlord on 22 December 2022. She said:
    1. the landlord had replaced her dual toilet flush with a single toilet flush.
    2. she wanted the landlord to refit the dual toilet flush as she was using more water than needed when flushing her toilet.
  3. The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 22 December 2022. It said:
    1. its plumber had replaced the resident’s dual toilet flush with a single flush, and it would not be able to change this.
    2. if the resident could show that the new flush had caused her a significant increase in water costs in a few months’ time, then it would look at this again.
  4. The resident and landlord exchanged emails between 22 December 2022 and 7 January 2023. The resident:
    1. continued to raise concerns about the toilet flush and increased water costs.
    2. provided a water bill to the landlord.
    3. asked to escalate her complaint on 7 January 2023, if the landlord maintained its position that it wanted evidence of increased water costs.
  5. The landlord’s records from 9 August 2023 show that the resident had provided evidence that it had installed a single flush button on her toilet and her water bill had increased. The resident queried if the landlord could install a dual flush button.
  6. The landlord responded at stage 2 on 15 August 2023. It said:
    1. it was sorry that the resident remained dissatisfied.
    2. it had arranged to fit a new toilet flush on 24 August 2023.
    3. in line with its compensation guidelines, it had offered compensation of £175 for the delay in responding at stage 2.
  7. In referring her complaint to the Ombudsman on 28 November 2023, the resident said she was unhappy because the landlord had not paid the compensation. She said this had caused her additional stress and she wanted additional compensation.
  8. On 8 January 2024, the resident confirmed that the landlord had paid the compensation and an additional £50 for the delay. However, she remained unhappy that it took almost a year to resolve her initial complaint raised in December 2022. 

Assessment and findings

  1. The landlord’s repairs policy states that:
    1. it is responsible for cistern and flushing mechanisms.
    2. it wants to provide residents with a reliable, modern and effective repairs service that undertakes repairs for which it has a responsibility to a good standard.
  2. The resident called the landlord on 22 December 2022 about it replacing her dual flush with a single flush. The landlord told her that if the flush was working it would not replace it. The landlord’s responsive repairs policy is silent on whether it should replace a toilet flush like for like. However, it does say that it would complete repairs to a good standard. The landlord has an obligation to complete repairs that it is responsible for, as well as appropriately managing its budgets and resources. Therefore, as the landlord had repaired the toilet flush, and it was functioning, it was appropriate for it to explain to the resident that it would not replace this.
  3. The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 22 December 2022. It said it would review any evidence that the new flush had caused a significant increase to the resident’s water bill if she could provide this. As the landlord did not have to replace the toilet flush if it was working, it was reasonable for the landlord to explain that it needed evidence of the increased water usage, which it said it would then review.
  4. On 27 December 2022 the resident provided a water bill dated 7 December 2022. She said in the accompanying email that her meter reading had increased. The landlord emailed the resident on 29 December 2022. It said it could not accept this water bill as the new flush was only in place for a month of the period the bill covered, and it did not show it had increased water usage. It was reasonable for the landlord to review the bill the resident had provided and explain its position in response to her concerns.
  5. The resident emailed the landlord on 1 January 2023. She reiterated that the single flush would use more water and increase her water bill. She said her complaint was that the landlord did not replace her toilet flush like for like. The landlord emailed the resident on 6 January 2023. It said the resident would have to provide evidence of increased water costs. It was reasonable for the landlord to explain its position to the resident in response to her concerns.
  6. The resident responded on 7 January 2023. She said she could not provide a usage figure as her water supplier only read the water meter every 6 months. She also said that her water supplier had confirmed that a dual flush saved more water and therefore money. She said the landlord had removed her ability to save water by fitting the wrong flush. The landlord did not respond. This was unreasonable.
  7. The landlord’s records from 9 August 2023 show that the resident had provided evidence of increased water costs since it had installed the single flush. The resident queried if the landlord could install a dual flush. There is no evidence that the landlord contacted the resident regarding her concerns about the toilet flush from 6 January 2023 to 9 August 2023. Although the landlord had told the resident to provide evidence of increased costs in a few months’ time this was unreasonable.
  8. In its stage 2 response of 15 August 2023 the landlord apologised that the resident had cause to complain. It said it had arranged to install a dual toilet flush on 24 August 2023. The landlord’s records show that it reinstated a dual toilet flush on 24 August 2023. As the resident had a functioning toilet flush, the landlord was under no obligation to do this. However, it considered the information provided by the resident, including her concerns that the single flush had caused an increase in water usage. Therefore, the landlord’s decision to do so was reasonable.
  9. In summary, the landlord did not have to replace the single toilet flush it fitted on 10 October 2023 because it had repaired the issue, and the resident had a functioning toilet. It therefore acted reasonably in asking the resident to provide evidence that the single flush had caused her water costs to increase and replacing the single flush with a dual flush when she did this. The landlord also responded promptly to the resident’s enquiries when she initially complained.
  10. However, the landlord did not communicate with the resident regarding the toilet flush from 6 January 2023 to 9 August 2023. The landlord told the resident to provide evidence of increased water costs in a few months. Even so, the Ombudsman considers there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about the replacement of her toilet flush due to this lack of contact.
  11. Therefore, we have ordered the landlord to write a letter of apology to the resident for the lack of communication regarding the toilet flush between January 2023 and August 2023. The letter should set out how it will prevent such communication errors occurring in future. The landlord should provide a copy of this letter to the Ombudsman.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

  1. The landlord operates a 2-stage complaint process that is compliant with the provisions of the Complaint Handling Code (the Code). It states that:
    1. a complaint is an expression of dissatisfaction however made.
    2. it would acknowledge a stage 1 complaint within 5 working days and send a written response within 10 working days unless it had agreed an extension with the resident.
    3. at stage 2 it would send a written response within 20 working days unless it had agreed an extension with the resident.
  2. The landlord’s compensation policy says that it will consider the impact of any failures in its complaint handling where it has not complied with the Code.
  3. The resident called the landlord and expressed dissatisfaction on 22 December 2022. The landlord did not acknowledge the resident’s complaint. However, its records show that it emailed its stage 1 response the same day. This was appropriate as it was within the 10 working days stipulated in the landlord’s complaint handling policy to provide a stage 1 response.
  4. The resident continued to demonstrate her dissatisfaction in her emails from 22 December 2022 to 1 January 2023. The landlord emailed the resident on 6 January and said if she was unhappy, it could escalate her complaint to stage 2. The landlord’s complaints policy states that a complaint was an expression of dissatisfaction however made. This was a shortcoming as the landlord could have escalated the resident’s complaint without the resident requesting this. The resident asked to escalate her complaint on 7 January 2023.
  5. The landlord did not provide its stage 2 response until 15 August 2023. This was inappropriate as it had gone well beyond the 20 working days stipulated in its complaint policy to provide this response from when the resident escalated her complaint. The landlord said it sent its stage 1 response on 6 January 2023. This was an oversight as its records show it emailed this to the resident on 22 December 2022. However, the landlord acknowledged the delay in providing its stage 2 response and offered £175 compensation for this. It was reasonable for the landlord to do this.
  6. The landlord’s records show that there was a delay in paying the £175 compensation and the resident chased this throughout November 2023. The landlord apologised for this delay on 8 December 2023 and added £50 for this making the total award £225. It said it had processed the payment and marked it as urgent. The resident has confirmed to the Ombudsman that she has received the compensation, so we have not made any recommendations regarding this.
  7. In summary, the landlord has acknowledged its delay in responding at stage 2 and paid £175 compensation for this. Although, the landlord did not acknowledge the slight delay in escalating the resident’s complaint and provided some incorrect information in its stage 2 response. After careful consideration of our remedies guidance the Ombudsman considers that the landlord has offered reasonable redress of £175. This appropriately recognised the inconvenience and upset caused by the failures in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about the replacement of her toilet flush.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Scheme the landlord has offered reasonable redress for its handling of the associated complaint.

Orders

  1. Within 28 days the landlord should write a letter of apology to the resident for the lack of communication regarding the toilet flush between January 2023 and August 2023. The letter should set out how it will prevent such communication errors occurring in future. The landlord should provide a copy of this letter to the Ombudsman.
  2. The landlord should provide evidence of compliance with the above order to the Ombudsman within 28 days of the date of this determination.