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

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) (202410614)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202410614 and 202426005

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

17 December 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:
    1. Response to the resident’s reports of issues with the boiler in the property.
    2. Complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident has an assured shorthold tenancy at the property, which is a 2 bedroom flat. She lives with her 2 children. She advised within the correspondence in this case that she has fibromyalgia, endometriosis and high blood pressure.
  2. The resident reported issues with the boiler breaking down, causing a lack of heating and hot water on a number of occasions between 15 December 2022 and July 2024. During this time the resident submitted 2 complaints to the landlord, complaint A on 22 August 2023 and complaint B in July 2024 (the exact date is not clear). The landlord competed its internal complaints procedure for complaint A on 30 April 2023. It summarised the action in had taken in respect of the boiler and acknowledged that the resident had been without heating and hot water for a period over the winter. It offered a total of £468 compensation. The landlord competed its complaints procedure for complaint B on 11 September 2024. It stated that it had tried to carry out repairs to the boiler, however the resident had refused, due to wanting a new boiler. It advised that it would not provide a new boiler when it could be repaired.
  3. This investigation will consider the landlord’s handling of both complaints, as they involve the same reported ongoing issue with the boiler.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident requested compensation for what she believed were inefficiencies with the boiler, which she felt had resulted in high energy bills for the last 10 years. The Ombudsman encourages residents to raise complaints with their landlords at the time the events happened. This is because with the passage of time, evidence may be unavailable and personnel involved may have left an organisation, which makes it difficult for a thorough investigation to be carried out and for informed decisions to be made. Taking this into account and the availability and reliability of evidence, this assessment has focused on the period from 15 December 2022 (the events leading up to the complaint) onwards. Any reference to events that occurred prior to this are made in this report to provide context.
  2. It should also be noted that the Ombudsman is not able make a finding on the reasonableness of the resident’s energy bills in regard to the cost of electricity per unit. Such a concern would need to be raised with the relevant Ombudsman, namely the Energy Ombudsman, in this case. However, this Service can consider the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about her energy bills and if its response was reasonable in the circumstances.
  3. The resident raised the issue of the impact of issues with the boiler breaking down on her mental and physical health. Whilst this Service is an alternative to the courts, it is unable to establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action have had a detrimental impact on a resident’s health. The Ombudsman is therefore unable to consider any personal injury aspects of the resident’s complaint. These matters are likely better suited to consideration by a court or via a personal injury claim. However, this Service will consider the landlord’s handling of the issues and any distress and inconvenience this may have caused. This Service would expect the landlord’s response to consider the resident’s reports on how the issue was impacting her, as this would reflect the detriment experienced as a result of potential failures by the landlord.

Response to the resident’s reports of issues with the boiler in the property

Circumstances in respect of complaint A

  1. On 15 December 2022 a heating contractor attended following a report of the resident having no heating or hot water. (It is not clear when this report was made). The contractor noted that a new programmer and thermostat were required. The landlord’s notes recorded that there was hot water at the property.
  2. Around 6 weeks later (24 January 2023) the resident reported an uncontainable leak from the boiler. A contractor attended that same day and found that a drain was blocked and a valve needed to be changed. It completed these works on 26 January 2023.
  3. The landlord noted internally on 6 February 2023 that further works were required to the boiler. It advised the contractor that if the work could not be completed by the following day, it would need to provide temporary heaters. The contractor subsequently provided temporary heaters to the resident on 9 February 2023.
  4. There was a gap in the correspondence seen by this Service until 11 August 2023, when the resident reported another uncontainable leak from the boiler. A contractor attended that day and noted that a part was faulty and the water supply needed to be isolated to reduce the leak.
  5. The resident submitted a complaint (complaint A) on 22 August 2023 and stated that her boiler was “constantly breaking down”. She stated that she had been without heating for 7 months in 2023. She also felt that the boiler was using an excessive amount of energy and was not appropriate for the property.
  6. Following the finding of the contractor (on 11 August) the landlord raised an emergency job on 23 August 2023 to replace the part. This was carried out on 25 August 2023. The landlord responded to the complaint at stage 1 on 8 September 2023 and stated that works to the boiler had been completed on 25 August 2023.
  7. There was a gap in correspondence until 4 December 2023 when the resident reported that the heating was not working. A contractor attended that day and advised the landlord that a new pump was needed. The resident chased this on 8 December 2023. She advised of the inconvenience of waiting in for contractor appointments and requested a new boiler. The resident contacted the landlord again on 19 December 2023 and advised that she was still without heating and that the hot water was intermittent. The landlord asked internally for an urgent update. However, this Service has also seen an internal note from the landlord (from the same day) where it stated it had amended the priority of the job from category 1 to category 3. No reasons for this were given. The following day (20 December 2023) the landlord raised a job to drain and replace the circulation pump.
  8. On 2 January 2024 the resident added to her complaint and stated that the family had to cope with a lack of heating and hot water over the Christmas period and they had been reliant on portable heaters. She stated that this had affected their wellbeing and her pre-existing health conditions. She stated that the hot water had been malfunctioning since 5 December 2023 but she had not been given a date for a repair. She described the lack of urgency as “appalling”. Following this, the heating contractor attended on 30 January 2024 and the circulation pump was replaced.
  9. On 15 April 2024 the resident contacted the landlord about her “exceptionally high electricity consumption”. She advised that the bills were unsustainable and she had stopped paying her energy direct debits. She requested “significant compensation” for excessive electricity bills “dating back years”.
  10. The landlord responded (to complaint A) at stage 2 on 30 April 2024. It advised that it had considered the period up to when the complaint had been made (on 22 August 2023) and stated as follows:
    1. It provided a timeline of the action it had taken (as summarised above). This Service has not seen contemporaneous notes, however the landlord stated that the repair (reported on 15 December 2022) had been arranged for 17 February 2023. An engineer had attended to carry out works but a senior engineer was found to be needed. This engineer had completed works on 2 March 2023 but recommended that the thermostat needed replacing as a screw had gone through wiring causing it to short out when used. This had been replaced on 29 March 2023.
    2. It apologised that the resident had experienced several heating faults and had no heating and hot water for a period of 2 months.
    3. It offered a total of £468 compensation as follows:
      1. £148 right to repair – loss of heating and hot water from 15 December 2022 to 17 February 2023. (£10 for the first 5 days and £2 per day until the repair was resolved.
      2. £100 distress (£50 x 2 months).
      3. £100 inconvenience.
      4. £120 complaint handling – 22 August 2023 to 30 April 2024 (6 months at £20 per month).
  11. The resident stated that the compensation offered was insufficient and that she had to rely on temporary heaters from 15 December 2022 to 17 February 2024. She stated that the inconvenience had gone beyond 2 months and included chasing the repairs along with unanswered calls and emails. She referred complaint A to the Ombudsman on 13 June 2024 and reiterated her request for a new boiler and compensation.
  12. Landlords are required to consider the condition of properties using a risk assessment approach called the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). The HHSRS does not set out any minimum standards, but it is concerned with avoiding, or minimising potential hazards. A lack of heating and hot water are potential hazards that can fall within the scope of the HHSRS. Landlords should be aware of their obligations under the HHSRS, and they are expected to carry out additional monitoring of a property where potential hazards are identified.
  13. It is not in dispute that the landlord is responsible for the boiler and ensuring it is in working condition. The landlord’s repairs policy sets out that it will respond to emergency works, (where there is an immediate danger to the occupant), within 24 hours to make safe. From there it will carry out a routine repair. For routine repairs it aims to compete these within an average of 25 calendar days.
  14. In respect of complaint A, it is clear that the resident had experienced issues with the boiler between 15 December 2022 and 29 March 2023 when it was repaired. This was a period of around 3 and a half months.
  15. The landlord asked for temporary heaters to be supplied by the contractor on 9 February 2023. This was around 7 weeks after the loss of heating was first reported by the resident on 15 December 2022. This Service has not seen any evidence that the resident had any working heating (from the boiler or temporary heaters) between 15 December 2022 to when the temporary heaters were supplied on 9 February 2023. This was despite the landlord being aware of her disclosed medical issues and the presence of children in the property.
  16. It is clear that the repairs to the boiler in early 2023 had been delayed due to a lack of communication that a senior engineer was required to carry out the works. This led to an ineffective appointment on 17 February 2023, where an engineer attended but could not carry out the works. It then took a further 2 weeks (until 2 March 2023) for the senior engineer to attend. The repair was completed and the engineer also identified an issue with the thermostat wiring, causing the boiler to short out. This was repaired on 29 March 2023.
  17. The next boiler issue (an uncontainable leak) was reported on 11 August 2023. The landlord appropriately raised a 24 hour emergency job in respect of this. The contractor who had attended that same day advised the landlord that a part was faulty. Despite being aware of this on 11 August 2023, the landlord did not raise a job for this until 23 August 2023, when it raised it as an emergency. The repaired was subsequently completed on 25 August 2023. This could have been actioned earlier had the landlord not delayed in raising the works.
  18. Within its stage 1 response (8 September 2023), the landlord advised that the work had been completed, however it failed to acknowledge that it had delayed in actioning this or the impact of this on the resident. It also failed to acknowledge this within its stage 2 response.
  19. In considering redress for complaint A at stage 2, the landlord acknowledged there had been issue with the boiler and that there had been no heating and hot water from the boiler for a period of 2 months. It based its calculation of compensation on the initial repairs having been completed on 17 February 2023. This was not accurate as the completion of the repairs was 29 March 2023.
  20. In summary, the landlord offered a total of £348 compensation for its handling of the boiler issues for complaint A, as follows (compensation for complaint handling has been considered separately):
    1. £148 right to repair – loss of heating and hot water from 15 December 2022 to 17 February 2023. (£10 for the first 5 days and £2 per day until the repair was resolved.
    2. £100 distress.
    3. £100 inconvenience.
  21. When a failure is identified, as in this case, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this, the Ombudsman takes into account whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: Be Fair, Put Things Right and Learn from Outcomes as well as our own guidance on remedies.
  22. The timeframe relied upon by the landlord in considering compensation for complaint A was incorrect as it based this on the repair having been resolved on 17 February 2023 instead of when the repair was in fact completed, on 29 March 2023. In addition, its compensation for the distress and inconvenience was not sufficient to acknowledge that the resident had been without a source of heat over the winter months between 15 December 2022 and 9 February 2023. This Service has not seen any evidence that the landlord considered the household vulnerabilities such as the resident’s disclosed medical conditions and the presence of 2 children in the property. This was unreasonable and as such the landlord failed to demonstrate that it had appropriately considered the impact to the resident. As the redress offered was calculated using the incorrect timeframe, this was not appropriate.

Circumstances in respect of complaint B

  1. On 9 July 2024 a heating contractor attended as the electrics were tripping when the boiler was on. The contractor noted that the breaker was tripping and advised that due to the age of the unit, it be replaced. The contractor advised that, as an alternative option, to conduct a repair would require 2 contractors.
  2. The date of the resident’s complaint (complaint B) is not clear, however, it appears it was made in July 2024. On 31 July 2024 the landlord responded to it at stage 1. It summarised the action it had taken since the complaint had been made and that it had raised a job to replace a part. It sent another stage 1 response on 2 August 2024 and stated as follows:
    1. An appointment had been made for 29 August 2024 to replace the faulty compressor. As the boiler could be repaired, it was unable to consider installing a replacement.
    2. It had spoken to the resident about her claim her energy bills were excessive. It advised that it would need to see her bills from the previous year to consider the matter. The resident had advised that she was unable to provide these due to her energy supplier changing. The landlord advised that if these could be provided it could consider the energy usage.
    3. It offered a total of £246 compensation, made up as follows:
      1. £10 right to repair.
      2. £96 loss of hot water.
      3. £60 distress for failure to recognise the impact due to vulnerabilities.
      4. £60 inconvenience for failure to recognise the impact due to vulnerabilities.
      5. £20 time and effort in bringing the complaint.
  3. The landlord subsequently responded to complaint B at stage 2 on 11 September 2024 and stated as follows:
    1. It had arranged repair works for 29 August 2024. However, the resident had  refused access for the repairs on the basis that she wanted a new boiler. It reminded her of her responsibility to enable it to carry out repairs. It would only renew items if they were unrepairable or not fit for purpose.
    2. It offered £20 compensation for complaint handing.
  4. Following the referral of complaint B to the Ombudsman, on 10 October 2024, the landlord raised a job to replace the boiler with an air source heat pump as an alternative form of providing heating and hot water.
  5. In respect of complaint B, a contractor advised the landlord on 9 July 2024 that a part of the boiler required replacement, as it was tripping the electrics. The landlord advised with its stage 1 response (2 August 2024) that it had booked this work for 29 August 2024. This was 2 days outside of its routine repair timeframe. It is not clear why this was delayed given that the resident was without hot water at the time. The resident had advised this Service of the impact of this, namely that the household had been boiling water in order to wash during this time.
  6. The landlord explained that it only replaced items which were unrepairable. Whilst this was reasonable, it failed to address the resident’s concerns about the amount of issues with the boiler. It also advised that it would consider the resident’s representations about her energy bills having increased if she could provide bills from the previous year. This was a reasonable request as it would enable the landlord to compare any change in usage and reach an informed decision.
  7. The landlord subsequently noted within its stage 2 response (11 September 2024) that the resident had refused access for the boiler repair to be carried out. It appropriately reminded her of the terms of the tenancy agreement to allow access for repairs.
  8. In summary, the landlord offered a total of £226 compensation for its handling of the boiler issues considered in complaint B, made up as follows:
    1. £10 right to repair.
    2. £96 loss of hot water.
    3. £60 distress for failure to recognise the impact due to vulnerabilities.
    4. £60 inconvenience for failure to recognise the impact due to vulnerabilities.
  9. The repair to the boiler considered in complaint B took from 9 July to 29 August 2024 to be completed. This was 2 days outside of its routine repair timeframe. It is not clear why this was delayed given that the household was without hot water, which had a significant impact on their ability to enjoy normal use of the property. The landlord failed to demonstrate that it had considered the impact on the household or the vulnerabilities, including the presence of children in arranging this repair. The landlord should have prioritised restabilising hot water to the property in the circumstances. The landlord’s total offer of £226 compensation for complaint B was not sufficient in the circumstance to acknowledge the loss of washing facilities and the impact on the vulnerable household.

Conclusion

  1. Given the landlord’s failures in its consideration of the repairs and redress, there was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of issues with the boiler in the property. To acknowledge the impact on the resident, this Service has ordered an additional £350 compensation. This is based on the landlord’s overall response to the issues with the boiler as outlined in both complaints. This brings the total compensation for this issue to £924. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance where there have been failures which had a significant impact on the resident. It is noted that following the completion of the internal complaints procedure for complaint B, the landlord replaced the boiler with a heat pump in October 2024, as per the resident’s request for the boiler to be replaced. Although this was after the completion of the internal complaints procedure this did demonstrate a desire to put things right in line with the resident’s request.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy states that it will log a complaint within 5 working days. It will respond at stage 1 within 10 working days of the acknowledgement. At stage 2 it will respond within 20 working days. If additional time is required at either stage it will keep the resident informed ad explain why.

Complaint A

  1. The resident submitted complaint A on 22 August 2023 and the landlord acknowledged it the same day. It apologised to the resident on 4 September 2023 that it had not responded to the complaint. It advised it was still waiting for information from the heating contractor. It subsequently provided its stage 1 response on 8 September 2023. This was 13 working days after the complaint had been submitted, however, the landlord had informed the resident of the delay and the reason for this.
  2. The resident escalated the complaint on 4 April 2024 and the landlord responded at stage 2 on 30 April 2024. This was a timeframe of 18 working days, so in line with its complaints policy.
  3. The landlord offered £120 compensation for its handling of complaint A. It based this on the complaint having taken 6 months to complete its internal complaints procedure. It is not clear why the landlord based the compensation on this timeframe given that the resident had not escalated the complaint until April 2024. In the circumstances, with the landlord only having delayed the stage 1 response by 3 days, the compensation offer was reasonable.

Complaint B

  1. This Service has not had sight of this complaint made by the resident to the landlord, although it related to a breakdown of the boiler around 8 July 2024. The landlord responded at stage 1 on 31 July 2024. It subsequently sent another stage 1 response on 2 August 2024 after speaking to the resident (it is not clear when).
  2. The resident escalated her complaint on 2 August 2024 and the landlord responded at stage 2 on 11 September 2024. This was a timeframe of 28 working days. This Service has not seen any evidence that the landlord had proactively kept the resident informed of this delay or the reasons for it. The stage 2 response lacked any explanation for this delay or how the landlord would prevent such a delay in the future. The landlord’s compensation policy states that it will pay £10 compensation for a failure to respond to a query within 10 working days where it is identified as part of a complaint investigation. It is not clear if this applies to complaints at both stage 1 and 2 of its complaints policy.
  3. The landlord failed to explain how it had determined that £20 compensation was reasonable for the 8 working day delay at stage 2 or that it had considered the frustration this caused to the resident. It also failed to acknowledge that it had provided two stage 1 responses, contrary to its complaints policy. The compensation offered for the complaint handling failures of complaint B were not sufficient to account for the inconvenience caused to the resident by the landlord’s failures. As such there is a determination of service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling. To acknowledge this, additional compensation of £100 has been ordered. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance where a landlord has made an offer of compensation which does not quite reflect the detriment to the resident.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of issues with the boiler in the property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to take the following action within 4 weeks of this report and provide evidence of compliance to this Service:
    1. Apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this case.
    2. Pay a total of £1184 compensation to the resident. This includes the landlord’s previous offer of £734 made during the internal complaints procedure. If the compensation offered during the internal complaints process has already been paid, this does not need to be paid again. The additional compensation is to be paid direct to the resident and is made up as follows:
      1. £350 to acknowledge the impact on the resident of the landlord’s response to the residents’ concerns about the boiler.
      2. £100 to acknowledge the impact on the resident of the landlord’s complaint handling failures in its consideration of complaint B.