London & Quadrant Housing Trust — case 202521452

Decision Case ID 202521452 Decision type Investigation Landlord London & Quadrant Housing Trust Landlord type Housing Association Occupancy Assured Tenancy Date 20 January 2026 Background The resident lives in a 3-bedroom house. The resident reported issues with the windows and front door in her property following which the landlord attended to conduct repairs. The resident wanted the landlord to replace the doors and windows. What the complaint is about The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for it to replace her front door and windows.

We have also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling. Our decision (determination) We have found that: There was no maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for it to replace her front door and windows. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling. We have not made orders for the landlord to put things right. Summary of reasons The landlord made a decision to replace the windows and door as part of its planned works programme, and to make repairs in the interim.

The landlord does not have an obligation to replace items which it can reasonably maintain through repair. Its response to the resident’s request to replace her front door and windows was reasonable and in line with its obligations under the tenancy and its repair policy. The landlord responded to the resident’s complaint in line with its complaint policy. Our investigation The complaint procedure Date What happened Between 16 April 2025 and 3 July 2025. The resident reported issues with several windows.

The landlord attended after each report and completed repairs. She also reported a problem with her front door. The landlord inspected and arranged a repair appointment, which the resident declined and asked for it to replace the door instead. 17 July 2025 The resident complained about the condition of her front door and windows. She said she had moved to the property after a mutual exchange with her mother, who had lived at the property for over 30 years. She reported that the front door was unsafe and that the previous 3 repairs completed were ineffective, as the door remained insecure and in poor condition.

She also said the windows were over 30 years old and that she experienced draughts throughout the property. In addition, there was visible deterioration of the frames and fittings. She asked the landlord to replace her front door and inspect the windows. 18 July 2025 The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. It said an area supervisor had attended the property and found that the front door was repairable, and that it would continue to carry out repairs. However, because of the age and overall condition of the front door and windows, it had submitted a renewal request for both.

It explained that renewals formed part of its planned works programme and could take up to 18 months for properties to be scheduled into the next financial year’s programme. 21 July 2025 The resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint because she was unhappy with the timescale for the renewal. She requested that the landlord replace her windows and front door. 18 August 2025 The landlord issued its final complaint response and maintained its position on how it planned to replace the front door and windows.

It said the resident had declined the front door repair when it attended in July 2025, and that she could contact it to request the repair again. It also provided further information about its planned works programme and said it would continue to carry out any further necessary repairs to the doors and windows in the meantime. Referral to the Ombudsman The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and asked us to investigate her complaint. She said she was unhappy with the condition of her front door and windows and with the timescales they would be replaced.

She requested the landlord provide her with a new front door and new windows. 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 response to the resident’s request for it to replace her front door and windows Finding No maladministration The resident reported she was unable to lock a window on 16 April 2025.

She also reported issues with the frames of two other windows on 23 May 2025 and 29 May 2025. The landlord attended within the 20-working day timescale set out in its repair policy and completed repairs to each window. There is no record the landlord identified any further problems or that the windows were beyond repair. An assessor had recently completed an Energy Performance Certificate on 27 March 2025, which rated the windows energy performance as average and did not recommend any improvements.

The resident reported a split in her front door panel on 27 May 2025. The landlord inspected the door on 10 June 2025 and found it was repairable. When the landlord later attended to carry out the repair, it recorded the resident declined the work and asked for the door to be replaced instead. The landlord’s repair policy states where age and wear and tear affect key components such as doors and windows, it will normally replace these through a planned programme of work rather than through routine repairs.

On 10 June 2025, the landlord identified the front door was repairable but due to the age and conditions of both the door and the windows, considered that they should be replaced through planned works. Its decision making was in line with its policies. In its complaint responses, the landlord set the resident’s expectations when it explained the likely timescales for door or window replacements through its planned works programme. It also confirmed that it would continue to meet its repairing obligations and carry out any necessary responsive repairs to both components.

It reiterated this by offering to repair the front door and it explained how the resident could report further issues. This approach was in line with the landlord’s repair obligations set out in legislation and as mirrored by its policies. In summary, the evidence shows the landlord acted appropriately by deciding to replace the front door and windows through its planned works programme and to offer repairs in the interim period. It inspected the windows and front door, confirmed they were repairable, completed repairs where the resident gave permission, and offered to carry out any further necessary repairs until the components were replaced.

This leads to a determination of no maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for it to replace her front door and windows. Complaint The handling of the complaint Finding No maladministration The landlord’s complaint policy is in line with our Complaint Handling Code (the Code). The landlord responded to the resident’s stage 1 and 2 complaints within the timescales of its policy. We have found no failures in the landlord’s complaint handling. This leads to a determination of no maladministration.

Learning Knowledge information management (record keeping) We have seen that the landlord kept records of contact made with the resident and repair logs. We have identified no issues with the landlord’s record’s keeping in this case. Communication We have identified no failures in the landlord’s communication. The landlord should keep the resident updated with any information regarding the planned works to replace her front door and windows.