London & Quadrant Housing Trust — case 202433298

Decision Case ID 202433298 Decision type Investigation Landlord London & Quadrant Housing Trust Landlord type Housing Association Occupancy Secure Tenancy Date 19 January 2026 Background The resident lives in a one bedroom flat owned by the landlord. She resides with her daughter who is asthmatic. She complained that, following a previous determination by us in January 2024 regarding damp and mould repairs, the landlord has not taken action to resolve the situation. What the complaint is about The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of: Communication with the resident about planned repairs.

The temporary move process. The resident’s associated complaint. Our decision (determination) There was service failure in the landlord’s communication about the planned repairs. There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the temporary move process. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling We have made orders for the landlord to put things right. Summary of reasons We have found that: The landlord’s communication with the resident about the planned repairs The landlord did not consistently provide the resident with weekly updates as it had agreed with her.

It also did not provide her with the full schedule of works it created following its inspection in February 2024. The landlord’s handling of the temporary move process The landlord missed opportunities to manage the resident’s expectations about what it could offer as part of the temporary move process. After she refused its offer of temporary accommodation it failed to assess the risk of allowing her to remain at the property whilst searching for alternative temporary accommodation.

It has not resolved the issue of moving her out of the property to begin repairs for around 2 years. The landlord’s complaint handling The landlord responded in line with timescales of our Complaint Handling Code (the Code) and its responses clearly explained its decisions and the reasons for these. Putting things right Where we find service failure, maladministration or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction.

Orders Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set. Order What the landlord must do Due date 1 Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure: The apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.

No later than 16 February 2026 2 Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £750 made up as follows: £50 for the resident’s distress and inconvenience from its communication with her about the planned works. £700 for the resident’s distress, inconvenience and loss of enjoyment of her home from its handling of the temporary move process and the resulting delays in resolving the repairs. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date.

No later than 16 February 2026 3 Inspection order The landlord must contact the resident to arrange an inspection. It must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. The inspection must be completed by someone suitably qualified to complete an inspection of the type needed. If the landlord cannot gain access to complete the inspection, it must provide us with documentary evidence of its attempts to inspect the property no later than the due date.

If temporary alternative accommodation is identified as required following the inspection the landlord must also write to the resident to set out how it will handle this in line with its policies. This must include how many offers it will make and the likely timescales. Where an agreement cannot be reached about temporary accommodation it also must explain to her any further action it intends to take to fulfil its obligations to complete the repairs. What the inspection must achieve The landlord must ensure that the surveyor: Inspects the damp and mould, and any other necessary repairs, to the property and produces a written report with photographs The survey report must set out: Whether the property is fit for human habitation and whether there are any hazards The most likely cause of the state what the damp and mould.

Whether the landlord is responsible to repair or resolve the issue together with reasons where it is not responsible A full scope of works to achieve a lasting and effective resolution to the issue (if the landlord is responsible) The likely timescales to commence and complete the work Whether temporary alternative accommodation is necessary either because of the condition of the property or during the works No later than 16 February 2026 Our investigation The complaint procedure Date What happened 4 November 2024 The resident made a complaint to the landlord that: following January 2024 it had promised to provide her with a full schedule of works but later said it would need to move her out of the property before it provided this it had not provided her a suitable temporary accommodation which was in line with the criteria she had provided it had not provided weekly updates to her as it had agreed its actions, including its threat to take legal action to remove her from the property, were causing her distress 7 November 2024 The landlord issued its stage 1 response: it told the resident it needed to conduct a new inspection, due to the since its previous inspection and it needed to relocate her to do this.

It said it could not provide a full schedule of works until it did this. the temporary accommodation it had offered was the only one it had available and the only other option was to stay with friends or family. It stated it had a responsibility to ensure the works were completed and it may need to seek legal action if she denied access. it had assigned the resident another single point of contact and would continue to provide updates 13 November 2024 The resident escalated her complaint.

she objected that a further inspection was necessary and it would not do this until she was out of the property it had not been transparent about why it had re-offered the same temporary accommodation it offered in January 2024. She also said it misled her about what it had available. she considered it was a conflict of interest for her single point of contact to also have handled her complaint 28 November 2024 The landlord issued its stage 2 response: it reiterated due to the nature of the repairs it will be necessary to rehouse the resident.

It cannot provide an accurate schedule of works until it has inspected again but stated it could complete the inspection whilst she was in the property. the offer of temporary accommodation was the closest one available. It had agreed to make a further offer of accommodation following January 2024 but advised her the possibility of meeting all her criteria was limited. As none became available it re-offered the previous property as its further offer. it said that it would not have sent her weekly updates when there was no information to update her with.

It confirmed the single point of contact would remain the same it stated it was important to tell her there was the possibility of legal action if she did not grant access to her home. It explained this was a last resort and wanted to work with her to resolve this. The landlord did not uphold the complaint or offer any remedy. Referral to the Ombudsman The resident remained unhappy with the landlord’s response and asked us to investigate her complaint. She told us the landlord has not taken any action to resolve the situation since its stage 2 response and she wanted it to complete the repairs.

What we found and why The circumstances of this complaint are well known by the parties involved, so it is not necessary to detail everything that’s happened or comment on all the information we’ve reviewed. We’ve only included the key information that forms the basis of our decision of whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration. Complaint The landlord’s communication with the resident about the planned repairs Finding Service failure What we have not investigated The resident made a previous complaint to us about the landlord’s handling of damp and mould in the property (our reference 202309325).

We determined this complaint on 16 January 2024. In line with our Scheme we may not investigate matters we have already decided on. This investigation has focussed on events after 16 January 2024. What we have investigated Our determination in case 202309325 made an order for the landlord to provide the resident with a single point of contact. As part of this order we said it was to provide her with a schedule of all the proposed works and weekly updates until the repair was resolved.

Its single point of contact wrote to her on 9 February 2024 to confirm it would provide her with a full action plan for the works and weekly updates. It also confirmed on 23 April 2024 that it would provide weekly updates regardless of whether there was new information to maintain a good level of communication with her. From the records between 9 February 2024 and the resident’s complaint on 4 November 2024 the landlord did not provide the resident with weekly updates as it agreed.

Though it contacted her on a regular basis there were some significant gaps, such as from 1 March 2024 to 17 April 2024 and from 6 August 2024 to 16 September 2024, where there is no evidence it contacted her despite her requesting updates. In the landlord’s stage 2 response it said it had not provided weekly updates when there was nothing to update the resident with as there was no benefit in providing these. This was not consistent with the approach it said it would follow.

In line with our Code if a landlord agrees to take action to put things right following a complaint it must follow this remedy through to completion. We recognise the impact on her from not receiving updates when there was no new information to share was limited. However, we still consider the lack of expected communication would have likely caused her a degree of distress or loss of confidence in the landlord. In terms of the schedule of works from both parties account of events the landlord carried out an inspection for the property in February 2024, though we have not seen a record of the inspection itself or any schedule of work created from it.

In its email of 17 April 2024 it told the resident it had created a full specification of the work to be completed but there is no evidence it sent this to her as it previously said it would. On 3 June 2024 the landlord told the resident that a full specification of the works had not been drawn up yet. This contradicted the information it gave her on 17 April 2024 and there was no explanation to her about why this had not been completed 3 months after the inspection. The landlord gave her an overview of the work it would carry out but said it would only provide a full schedule of works once the temporary accommodation was in place.

It gave no reason why it could not provide this at the time. Following the resident’s complaint the landlord told her on 5 November 2024 it would need to carry out another inspection to assess if the situation had changed and whether any additional repairs were required. It said it could not provide a full schedule of works until it completed this. As it had been around 8 months since the previous inspection this was a reasonable position for it to take in line with its repairs policy.

The landlord originally told the resident it needed to relocate her into temporary accommodation before this inspection could take place. In its stage 2 response of 28 November 2024 though, it agreed it could complete the inspection with her in the property and then issue her with the full schedule of works. It asked to confirm her availability for an inspection and there is no evidence she responded to this. As such we have not seen a failing in the landlord’s communication at that time.

Complaint The landlord’s handling of the temporary move process Finding Maladministration Our determination in case 202309325 also made an order for the landlord to arrange for a further offer of temporary accommodation to be made to the resident so the repairs could be resolved. On 23 January 2023 it wrote to her offering her a 1 bedroom ground floor flat as like-for-like temporary accommodation and said it would arrange a viewing with her on 29 January 2023. The resident told us she viewed the property and told the landlord it was unsuitable, though we have not seen records of this.

On 9 February 2024 the landlord’s single point of contact told the resident its housing team would assist with the temporary move process. On 17 April 2024 the landlord contacted the resident again to say it was aware she had previously declined offers of temporary accommodation as being unsuitable. It asked her to provide the criteria she needed for the temporary move so it could “ensure that we find a [property] that we can temporarily transfer you to”. She provided her criteria on 26 April 2024 which included that the temporary property was within one mile of her current home.

Whilst it was good practice in line with its allocations and lettings policy to take action to understand her needs there was a missed opportunity at the time to effectively manage her expectations. It did not advise her it may not be possible to find a property which met all of the criteria she requested. The landlord told the resident on 1 May 2024 it would endeavour to meet the criteria she had provided but that it could not provide a timeline for when a property became available.

It continued to update her in May and June 2024 that its rehousing team was looking into temporary accommodation. On 8 July 2024 the landlord told the resident the property it had offered her on 23 January 2024 was still available. It acknowledged she had previously rejected this but asked if she would consider viewing it again. She said in response the property was not within a mile of her current property so it did not meet her criteria, she asked it to look at other options such as 2-bedroom properties.

Its allocations and lettings policy says offers of temporary accommodation are made on a like-for-like basis so its decision not to act on her request was consistent with this. That said there was another missed opportunity to manage her expectations that it would only offer like-for-like properties. On 6 August 2024 the landlord wrote to the resident again and explained it did not have any properties available which met all her criteria. It acknowledged the property it had offered previously was 2 miles away from her home but it considered it was a suitable offer and it needed her to make a decision on this.

It reiterated its view on 16 September 2024 and said the only other option was to offer her payments to stay with friends or family during the repairs. This was in line with its allocations and lettings policy which says for temporary moves it will make one offer of accommodation on a like-for-like basis or pay the resident an allowance to stay with family or friends if this is an option. The resident continued to refuse the temporary accommodation offered by the landlord as it did not meet all of the criteria from her email of 26 April 2024.

On 16 October 2024 it wrote to her stating the property it had offered was appropriate and suitable and in light of the delays it needed to progress the repairs to make sure the property was in a safe condition. It told her if she continued to refuse to move into the temporary accommodation offered it would need to consider appropriate next steps which could include legal action. It reiterated this in both of its formal responses to her complaint. This was in line with its allocations and lettings policy which says if a resident refuses to move to temporary accommodation it needed to consider the risks to them remaining in the property and if these are too high it will consider taking legal action for them to move.

Though we recognise the reference to possible legal action may have caused her distress it was appropriate of it to inform her this was a possible outcome. The landlord issued a letter on 25 November 2024 saying that it was offering the property originally offered on 23 January 2024 as its formal offer of temporary accommodation. It said if she refused to move so it could complete the repairs it would consider this a breach of her tenancy. It also said it intended to start legal proceedings if she did not respond by 10 December 2024.

However, following her response it told her on 11 December 2024 it would look for an alternative one bedroom property as temporary accommodation. It outlined its process for offing temporary accommodation and stated finding her temporary accommodation within a specific area may take “months or even years” so it could expedite the process if she was willing to consider alternative locations. The resident has told us the landlord has not carried out any repairs to the property.

As of the date of this report, we have seen no evidence it has inspected the property or made another offer of temporary accommodation meaning the situation has not been addressed 2 years after it began this process. Its decision to make a further offer of temporary accommodation is outside of what its allocations and lettings policy says it will do. Its policy says if a resident refuses an offer of temporary accommodation it needs to assess if they can remain in the property during repairs and whether there are immediate risks from threat to life or health and safety issues.

There is no evidence the landlord has inspected to assess whether there are risks to the resident remaining in the property, without repairs taking place, until an alternative temporary accommodation becomes available. This is not in line with the principles of its policy. This failing is of particular concern considering the repairs relate to damp and mould and the resident’s daughter is asthmatic. Complaint The handling of the complaint Finding No maladministration The landlord operates a 2-stage complaint process.

It acknowledges complaints within 5 working days. It responds to stage 1 and 2 complaints within 10 and 20 working days respectively. This is compliant with the Code. Following the resident’s complaint on 4 November 2024 the landlord wrote to her the following day setting out her complaint as it understood it. It said this was a duplicate complaint from the determination in January 2024 and it would not be responding to this under its complaint process. However, it said it wanted to work with her to resolve the issues.

In line with its complaints policy and the Code, matters which have previously been considered under its complaints policy are acceptable reasons where a landlord can decide not to consider a complaint. The resident objected to the landlord’s understanding of her complaint as a duplicate of her previous complaint as she said it was about the issues that had occurred since January 2024. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint to her on 7 November 2024, 3 working days after she brought it to its attention.

Though its initial understanding that she was repeating her original complaint was a shortcoming it agreed to provide a response under its complaints process and did so in line with the timescales of its policy and the Code. As such we do not see this constitutes a failing. The resident said the landlord did not discuss the complaint with her before it issued its stage 1 response. However, its emails of 5 and 6 November 2024 set out her complaint as it understood it and the outcomes she wanted.

The resident also told it on several occasions she did not want it to contact her by phone. As such we do not see the landlord deviated from the requirements of the Code in defining the complaint with her. The resident escalated her complaint on 13 November 2024, the landlord acknowledged and defined the complaint with her the following day. It then issued its stage 2 response on 28 November 2024, 10 working days after its acknowledgement. This was in line with the timescales of its policy and the Code.

The resident said she considered it was a conflict of interest for the landlord’s stage 1 complaint handler to be her new single point of contact for the repairs. Its policy does not make provisions for who can handle a complaint it receives at stage 1 and says “the person or department best placed to help” will respond. Though she may have preferred someone else to issue the response we have not seen any indication the staff member concerned could not respond to her complaint.

Its stage 2 response was responded to by a different complaint handler which is consistent with the expectations of the Code. In both of the landlord’s responses it addressed all parts of the resident’s defined complaint, explained its decisions and the reasons for these. This is in line with the requirements of the Code. Learning In light of the introduction of Awaab’s Law the landlord should ensure its policy contains suitable guidance for its staff to meet the key requirements of this legislation, as highlighted in the Ombudsman’s ‘Learning from severe maladministration’ report from October 2025.

Its damp and mould policy should set out specific timescales for how quickly it will respond to reported damp and mould and how it will assess risk and resolve access issues. Knowledge information management (record keeping) The landlord should ensure it creates written reports from its inspections. This will allow it to demonstrate a clear rationale for the repairs it raises and any other relevant decision (such as whether a temporary move is required for the occupants). Communication Though the landlord’s made an agreement with the resident on how it would communicate it did not act in line with this.

It should ensure it follows any agreed communication plan with specific residents to maintain a good relationship with them and that it manages their expectations if they request a level of communication it cannot reasonably achieve.