The new improved webform is online now! Residents and representatives can access the form online today.

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202102187)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202102187

London & Quadrant Housing Trust

16 September 2021


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 level of compensation the landlord offered the resident for repair delays.

Background and summary of events

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord. She lives on the second floor of her building.
  2. On 7 December 2020 the resident reported to the landlord that her balcony door was not locking correctly. An operative attended the same day, and made the door safe. It is unclear whether they advised the resident that they would reattend for a follow-up appointment.
  3. On 11 January 2021 the resident reported that her toilet was leaking. She said she had to mop up puddles of water on the bathroom floor. She also reported that no hot water was coming out of her shower tap. An operative attended on 15 January, ordered parts, and scheduled a follow up appointment for 29 January. The landlord contacted the resident on 26 January to advise that its operative had fallen ill, and rearranged the appointment for 10 February. On 9 February the landlord advised the resident that the parts were not ready, and rescheduled for 18 February.
  4. On or around 11 February 2021(the exact date is unknown) the resident raised a formal complaint to the landlord. The landlord’s records show she was dissatisfied that her toilet repair had been rearranged. She explained she had a medical condition meaning she used her toilet frequently. She said her home smelt due to the leak. The resident also explained that she could not lock her balcony door. She raised her concerns about neighbours potentially accessing her home through the door.
  5. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint on 11 February 2021. It said it would investigate whether it could bring forward the outstanding repairs to her toilet (due 18 February) and balcony (due 5 March).
  6. An operative attended on 18 February 2021 and repaired the toilet and shower.
  7. The landlord issued its stage one complaint response on 19 February 2021. It explained that due to the COVID-19 pandemic the need to reschedule appointments had become more frequent. It apologised for the delay in repairing her toilet, and offered £100 compensation. It said it was unable to bring forward the date for the balcony door repair due to the limited availability of its maintenance team. It concluded by explaining how the resident could escalate her complaint if she remained dissatisfied. 
  8. The resident escalated her complaint on 19 February 2021. She was dissatisfied with the landlord’s offer of £100. She said the operative who attended on 15 January said she needed a new toilet and shower, and that it would take two weeks to resolve. She said her balcony door was her only source of ventilation. She said although the operative locked the door with a key in December 2020, she still felt vulnerable as her flat was easily accessible. She said the door would not shut properly.
  9. The landlord issued its stage two complaint response on 23 March 2021. It acknowledged that it took 38 days to repair the toilet. It apologised, and explained that the delay was due to it ordering new parts, and because an operative fell ill. It said it was unable to bring the balcony door repair date forward. It explained that its operative had not completed the repair scheduled for 5 March as the parts ordered were not compatible with the door. It said that on 5 March it realised that a specialist contractor would have to attend, and acknowledged that the operative who attended on 7 December 2020 should have realised that. It said the specialist was awaiting parts and would contact the resident to arrange an appointment. It apologised for the delay. It said it had fed back the resident’s concerns to its team to ensure they learnt from her experience. It offered £590 compensation which comprised of:
    1. £120 for distress and inconvenience (for the toilet repair).
    2. £50 for poor service and cancelled appointments (for the toilet repair).
    3. £160 for distress over four months (for the door repair).
    4. £160 for inconvenience over four months (for the door repair).
    5. £100 for time and effort and poor service (for the door repair).  
  10. The resident emailed the landlord on 14 April 2021. She said its offer of compensation was unfair considering what she had endured. She said it had not offered compensation for her shower which she was unable to use for a month. She said she was unable to use her bath as an alternative due to a medical condition. She said her balcony door was still not fixed, and asked how it could offer compensation if it had not completed the work.
  11. On 26 April 2021 the landlord issued its final complaint response. It said it would contact the resident with an update on the door repair. It offered an additional £80 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by the additional month needed to repair of the balcony door. It offered an additional £40 for the distress and inconvenience caused from the shower not being repaired within its 20 working day timeframe for critical repairs. It concluded by explaining how the resident could refer her complaint to this Service if she remained dissatisfied
  12. The landlord’s records show the balcony door was repaired on 27 April 2021.

Assessment and findings

  1. The landlord’s tenant repairs and responsibilities booklet explains that it will attend to emergency repairs (where the is an immediate danger) within 24 hours. It will arrange a mutually convenient appointment for non-emergency repairs. The booklet does not give a time frame for non-emergency repairs, but the generally accepted basic standard amongst social landlords is usually 28 days for general reactive repairs.
  2. The resident reported that her toilet was leaking, and that her shower’s hot water tap was not working on 11 January 2021. After cancelling two appointments, the landlord completed the repairs on 18 February. The landlord apologised for the delay, explained why it had cancelled the appointments, and offered £210 compensation.
  3. The leak from the toilet, and the non-functioning hot water in the shower would clearly have been frustrating and inconvenient issues for the resident. However, no evidence has been provided for this investigation indicating that the leak meant the toilet did not work, or that the resident had no washing facilities at all. The landlord explained in its complaint response that its target timeframe for “critical repairs” was 20 working days. That timeframe is not referred to in its repairs booklet, which only sets out emergency and non-emergency repairs. Nonetheless, the landlord’s offer of £210 was reasonable considering that the delay was noticeable but not excessive (10 days over the 28 day general guide), and no adverse, or long term impact resulted from it (notwithstanding the resident’s understandable inconvenience and frustration).
  4. On 7 December 2020 the resident reported that her balcony door was not locking properly. The landlord attended that day to make the door safe. It arranged a follow up appointment for 5 March 2021, and completed the work on 27 April 2021. That was clearly an extensive delay. The landlord acknowledged the delay, explained how it had happened, apologised, and in total offered £500 compensation in light of it.
  5. The level of compensation offered by the landlord was in line with the Ombudsman’s own remedies guidance for a complaint when there has been considerable service failure (such as delay) but no permanent impact from it.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 55 (b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint satisfactorily.

Reasons

  1. The landlord acknowledged, and apologised for the delays and the inconvenience caused. In the circumstances of the complaint, the landlord’s offers of compensation were reasonable and in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance