London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) (202223960)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202223960

London & Quadrant Housing Trust

25 July 2023

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

The complaint is about:
1. The landlord’s handling of reports that the resident tripped in a communal car park.
2. The landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Background

The resident has an assured tenancy. She occupies a 3-bedroom house that includes fixed service charges for grounds maintenance, tree works and caretaking services. The resident is registered disabled with osteo-arthritis.
The resident advised that on 12 August 2022, she fell in the communal car park due to an uneven pavement. The resident sustained injuries as a result and contacted the landlord the same day to advise them of the incident. The landlord completed an incident form with the resident and a job was logged for repairs to be done to the paving.
The resident states she was not contacted by the landlord regarding the incident nor did it conduct any form of welfare call or visit. She advised that she chased the landlord on the 18 August, 30 August, and 14 September 2022 to discuss the fall and injury.
The resident remained unhappy with the lack of communication from the landlord and wanted compensation for her accident and logged a formal complaint on 14 September 2022. The complaint went through the landlord’s complaint process, and a stage 2 response was issued on 13 January 2023.
The landlord provided a timeline of the events since the accident. It acknowledged that it had failed to communicate with the resident and that there had been delays in responding at both stages of the complaints process. It offered the resident £250 compensation which included:
1. £20 for the delay in responding to the stage 1 complaint.
2. £30 for the delay between stage one and stage 2 resolution.
3. £50 for communication failure.
4. £50 for the time and effort in bringing the complaint to the landlord.
5. £100 for the distress and inconvenience.
The resident remained dissatisfied and brought her complaint to this service. The resident feels that the financial compensation offered does not reflect the outstanding concerns and frustrations. She also feels that she has not been compensated for the personal injuries that required her to visit hospital. In addition, the paving in the communal car park has still not been repaired and is still a trip hazard. The resident said that she was looking to move home to be closer to her son.
The resolution the resident is seeking is:
1. The amount of compensation offered to be reviewed.
2. Compensation for the personal injuries sustained.
3. The car park to be repaired.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

As part of the resolution, the resident has requested that she wishes to move to be closer to her son. The handling of the transfer request has been completed as a separate matter and falls under another case reference with this service and so will not form part of this investigation.

The landlord’s handling of reports that the resident tripped in a communal car park.

The landlord’s accident and incident reporting investigation policy states that all accidents must be reported and investigated. It states it applies to anyone who could be harmed or involved in an accident. It defines an accident as unplanned and undesired event which occurs suddenly and causes injury. It states that once the landlord is made aware of an incident, a manager will commence an investigation within 24 hours of being notified. It also states that if the incident results in a member of the public being taken to hospital, it must escalate without delay to the appropriate team and notify Health & Safety, Group Director, and the Regional Manager.
The resident reported to the landlord that she fell on the 12 August 2022. A member of staff completed some of part 1 of the Corporate Health & Safety Accident and Incident Form. The form states that part 2 must be completed by the landlord only and that it should be sent to the incident mailbox. The evidence suggests this was done but the relevant team failed to pick the form up or carry out any investigations in line with its policy, this is service failure by the landlord.
The resident also reported the paving to the landlord on the same day (12 August 2022). A job was raised but later cancelled as no one was available to attend. The job was re-booked for the 15 August 2022 and is recorded as being completed. This service cannot find fault with the response to the repair on this occasion.
The evidence shows the resident chased the landlord on 18 and 31 August 2022 for an update following the fall, as no one had contacted her to discuss the incident. This is not in line with the landlord’s policy and demonstrates poor communication by the landlord, which amounts to service failure.
A second incident form was completed on 30 August 2022. It is not clear from the evidence what was done following completion of the form and there is no evidence of any investigations being made by the landlord. The policy states it will do this within 24 hours. It has failed to do so.
The resident had still not heard back from the landlord regarding the incident and contacted it again on 14 September 2022, 33 days after the incident. The resident advised that the landlord had contacted her but that was in relation to other issues. She was unhappy with the lack of care shown by the landlord and logged a formal complaint. A visit was arranged for the landlord to attend on 23 September 2022.
The resident said she was seeking compensation for her injuries. There is no evidence to suggest that anyone advised the resident of the process she would need to follow in order to claim for personal injury until the stage 2 complaint response on 13 January 2023, which was five months after the incident had taken place. This is not acceptable and is further evidence that the landlord failed to apply its own policy in this instance.
As part of the stage 2 response, the landlord offered the resident £250 compensation. This service does not consider this is reasonable redress. It has failed to follow its own process and it has not recognised this, nor has it demonstrated how it intends to put things right in accordance with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles.
The evidence also shows that the paving in the communal car park has since been raised again by the resident. This was raised on 10 January 2023, 17 January 2023, 1 February 2023 and 16 March 2023. The landlord has confirmed on 14 June 2023, that the work is still outstanding. It states that a contractor has attended and taken photo’s but has requested a joint visit with a surveyor. It has not indicated what repairs are required, when the repairs will be done and what safety measures are in place in the interim, this is not acceptable.
In summary, there is maladministration in the handling of reports that the resident had a fall in the communal car park. The landlord’s policy states that once notified of an accident or incident, an investigation will commence within 24 hours, and that where it has resulted in an injury, it should be escalated without delay, it failed to do so.
The landlord has not disputed it is responsible for the paved area where the resident fell. In addition, as this is a common area, it would have had imputed knowledge of disrepair and was under a duty to repair it so that it did not cause loss or injury to one of its residents or a passerby. The Ombudsman is not able to say, based on the evidence in this case, whether the resident was injured or whether her pre-existing conditions were exacerbated by the fall. Those questions are often better dealt with by the courts. However, the Ombudsman can say that it is likely the resident will have been caused some distress and discomfort following the fall – and it would be fair in all the circumstances for the landlord to offer some level of compensation for this and allow her to make a claim to its liability insurers.
The Ombudsman’s Guidance on remedies sets out when the Ombudsman should award compensation and the factors to be considered based on the impact to the resident. In this case, the landlord failed to follow its policy, it failed to communicate with the resident, and it failed to advise the resident about how to claim for personal injury. The Ombudsman considers that £500 compensation is appropriate to recognise the distress, discomfort and inconvenience caused to the resident.

The landlord’s handling of the complaint.

The landlord has a two-stage complaint process. It states that when a complaint is logged, it will contact the resident by the end of the next working day and respond to the complaint within ten working days. If the complaint is escalated, someone not involved at stage one will carry out a review and respond in 20 working days. At both stage 1 and stage 2, it states that if it needs more time to investigate, it will contact the resident and explain why.
The resident logged a complaint on 14 September 2022, in line with its policy, the landlord should have completed the investigation no later than ten working days. It responded to the resident on 21 October 2022, this was after the resident had contacted the landlord for an update. This is not in line with its policy and is service failure.
On 21 October 2022 the resident asked for the complaint to be escalated. She was not happy with the level of compensation offered (£80) and felt that the landlord had not addressed the complaint fully. In line with its policy, the landlord should have responded within 20 working days or contacted the resident to explain if it needed longer to do so. It did not respond until 13 January 2023, which was three months after the complaint was escalated. The resident had to contact the landlord for updates and was advised the delay was due to volume of complaints and staff shortages. The landlord should have contacted the resident to advise of any delays, it failed to do so, and it did not manage the complaint in line with its policy, this is service failure.
The landlord offered £250 compensation in its final response. This was for several items. Whilst this service does not deem this fair for the substantive handling of the fall and the repair, it is a fair level of compensation to recognise poor complaint handling.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports that the resident tripped in a communal car park.
In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has offered fair reasonable redress for the handling of the complaint.

Orders

The Ombudsman orders the landlord to within 28 days of the date of this decision, pay the resident an additional £500 compensation for the distress, inconvenience, and discomfort by the landlord’s handling of the repairs to the communal car park, the resident’s fall, and subsequent communication.

Recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the landlord:
1. Pays the resident the £250 it already offered her for its complaints handling.
2. It allows the resident to make a claim of its indemnity insurance for the personal injury.
3. It considers the resident’s request to move home under its allocations policy and offers the resident advice on how to make an application with the local authority.