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

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) (202214705)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202214705

London & Quadrant Housing Trust

22 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
    1. the resident’s window repairs;
    2. the associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of a property owned by the landlord. The resident has some health issues which she has informed the landlord of. The landlord does not have any health issues recorded for the resident.
  2. Since early 2019, the resident has had problems with some of the windows in her home. On 21 May 2019, the resident made a complaint about mishandling of window repairs. An inspection on 10 April 2019 had identified works that needed completing, however the resident had reported that she experienced two appointments which were not attended by the landlord’s contractors, despite the resident taking time off work for them. A further two appointments were missed by the landlord before the necessary repairs were confirmed as completed on 23 July 2019.
  3. On 16 November 2021, the resident reported further faults with many of her windows. Some would not open, some were difficult to close. The handles had come off windows in the bathroom and bedroom. The landlord attended the resident’s home on 24 March 2022 and established that six new handles were required. An order was placed and the resident was advised that the works would be completed when the handles had been sourced.
  4. On 11 July 2022, the resident made a formal complaint to the landlord. She was unhappy with the length of time it was taking to repair her windows. She stated the follow-on works had been booked for 7 October 2022, nearly a year after the report of faults had been made. She stated that she has had one lung removed due to lung cancer and therefore was suffering as a result of not being able to open her windows in the summer heat.
  5. The landlord issued a stage one complaint response the following day. It apologised for the resident’s dissatisfaction. It said it had escalated her repair booking and that someone would be in touch to bring the appointment forward. It said it did not uphold her complaint. The resident responded to the landlord on the same day and expressed her unhappiness with the landlord’s “vague” complaint response. She asked for her complaint to be escalated to stage two of the complaint process.
  6. On 20 July 2022, the resident made a further request to the landlord to escalate her complaint. On 7 October 2022, the landlord acknowledged this request. On the same day, the landlord’s operatives did not arrive for the appointment to repair the resident’s windows, despite the resident receiving a text message saying the operative was on their way. The repair was re-booked for 24 October 2022.
  7. On 4 November 2022, the landlord issued its stage two complaint response. It acknowledged the delay with escalating the resident’s complaint and explained this was due to a backlog of complaints that the landlord was working through. It accepted there had been significant delays with resolving the resident’s problems with her windows. It acknowledged the inconvenience caused by faulty windows. It accepted that appointments had been cancelled without noticed, arranged for an incorrect time or that operatives had attended without the correct materials. It offered £1,000 compensation, comprised of:
    1. £720 to recognise the distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident;
    2. £120 for the delay to the repair;
    3. £60 for missed and incorrectly booked appointments;
    4. £50 to recognise the resident’s time and effort;
    5. £50 for the delay to the stage two response.
  8. The landlord confirmed that £859 of the compensation would be used to offset the resident’s current rent arrears, with a cheque for the remaining £141 being sent to the resident. It confirmed the next appointment to repair the windows had been booked for 18 November 2022.
  9. The appointment scheduled for 18 November 2022 was cancelled and re-booked for 21 November 2022. This appointment also did not go ahead and was arranged for 2 December 2022. The records show a further missed appointment on 14 December 2022. The need for an asbestos survey was identified, which was booked for 14 February 2023. The resident has informed this Service a senior representative of the landlord attended her property in March 2023 and agreed that her windows needed replacing. However, the resident has since been informed by the landlord that this could take a further 16-18 months.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident tells this Service that the issues with her windows go back several years. The Ombudsman looks at issues that have been brought to the landlord as a formal complaint, where the landlord has had the opportunity to respond through its internal complaints process.
  2. The issues that led to the resident making a formal complaint to the landlord in July 2022 stemmed from the resident’s report of faults with her windows in November 2021. Whilst the historic problems with the windows give context to more recent events, the Ombudsman’s investigation is focused on the period from November 2021 onwards. This is in accordance with paragraph 42c of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, which states that complaints will not usually be considered that were not brought to the attention of the member landlord within a reasonable period of time, usually within six months of the matter arising.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s window repairs

  1. The resident is an assured tenant, which means the landlord is legally obliged to carry out repairs, in most circumstances, in her home. The landlord’s repairs policy accepts responsibility for most window repairs and says it aims to complete routine repairs at the “earliest mutually convenient appointment”. Relevant legislation says that the landlord must complete repairs within a “reasonable” timeframe. It is typically understood in the sector that best practice is to resolve repairs within a month. This Service acknowledges that some repairs are complex or require specialist parts and therefore may take longer.
  2. The resident made a report of faults with her windows on 16 November 2021. The landlord did not attend the resident’s home to inspect the issues until over four months later, on 24 March 2022. The reason for the delay is not clear. This Service does not consider a period of more than four months for an initial inspection to be “reasonable”. Given the resident’s dissatisfaction with the length of time this took, it is unlikely that 24 March 2022 represented the “earliest convenient appointment” for her.
  3. The follow-on works established on 24 March 2022 were booked in to be completed on 7 October 2022. This was more than six months after the inspection took place. The landlord’s stage one complaint response promised to bring the appointment forward, but the appointment was not moved forward and the contractor did not turn up to it. This was unacceptable. Rescheduled appointments for 18 November 2022 and 21 November 2022 were also cancelled and the resident has said she missed work to attend these appointments. Missed or cancelled appointments continued into December 2022.
  4. There is a lack of evidence to show that the landlord or its contractors contacted the resident to let her know appointments would be cancelled on a number of occasions. Four appointments were not attended in three months in early 2019 before the required works were completed. Although the Ombudsman’s investigation is focused on more recent events, the missed appointments from 2019 show a pattern of behaviour by the landlord’s operatives. The landlord should have prioritised the window repair reported in 2021 and taken appropriate action to ensure that appointments were not missed in view of the resident’s previous poor experience.
  5. As well as the missed appointments, the resident has also referred to numerous calls to the landlord which were not returned. Such poor service from the landlord over an extended period of time may have reasonably given the resident the impression that the landlord was not taking her concerns seriously. The resident has also expressed to the landlord and this Service about the significant time and effort that dealing with these issues has required from her. She describes that the responsibility fell to the resident to contact the landlord to get an explanation and an indication of the next steps throughout the repairs process. The resident should not have to go to such lengths to ensure the landlord meets its obligations to her.
  6. The resident has made the landlord aware of her medical conditions which meant she experienced a more significant impact as a result of not being able to open her windows than those without such medical issues. The landlord indicated to this Service that it did not have any such issues recorded for the resident. There is no evidence that the landlord conducted an assessment of how the resident’s window repair issues may affect her health and if that meant that the repair should be prioritised or if the resident should be temporarily moved while repairs were carried out if the property was uninhabitable because of her health.
  7. To date, the landlord has still not repaired the resident’s windows. The resident has told this Service that a visit from the landlord in March 2023 resulted in the landlord accepting that the windows need replacing. However, as this has been estimated as taking another 16-18 months, the resident faces another summer unable to open the windows of her property to deal with hot weather. This Service finds this to represent severe maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the window repairs.
  8. The landlord should fully replace the resident’s windows. It is usually reasonable for landlords to opt for repairs rather than replacements in the first instance as a means of managing costs which would otherwise be passed on to residents through their service charges. However, where a repair has been attempted several times and not succeeded in resolving the issue, the landlord should look at arranging a replacement rather than attempt further repairs. This will reduce any further inconvenience to the resident from repeated repair attempts.

The landlord offered and paid £1000 financial compensation to the resident and her rent account at stage two of its complaints process. However, this Service finds that an additional offer of £850 compensation to remedy the failures with the window repairs is appropriate in the circumstances. This is to reflect the fact that there were further instances of missed or incorrectly booked appointments following the stage two complaint response, causing additional distress and inconvenience for the resident. The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance suggests that awards of £700 and above in a compensation category (such as ‘distress and inconvenience’) may go some way to remedy cases where there has been severe maladministration by the landlord, with a severe and long-term impact on the resident. In this case, there is evidence that the window repair has had a significant, long-term impact on the resident, particularly in view of her breathing problems.

The handling of the resident’s complaint

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy states that the landlord will respond to complaints within 10 working days at stage one of the process. If the complaint is escalated to stage two of the process, the landlord will make contact with the resident within two working days and will issue a stage two response within 20 working days. The policy states that if it cannot meet the deadline, it will write and explain why and issue the response within a further 10 working days.
  2. The resident formally complained to the landlord on 11 July 2022 about the length of time it had taken for her windows to be repaired following her report in November 2021. The landlord issued its stage one response the following day. The resident was unhappy with the response and felt it was vague. The response did not uphold the resident’s complaint. However, it apologised for the delays the resident had experienced with the window repairs and said it had “escalated” the next repair appointment. It is not clear from the letter why the complaint had not been upheld as the landlord had admitted to making errors and apologised. However the landlord did not offer to take any action to remedy the failings it had apologised for. The response stated that the resident’s appointment would be brought forward from 7 October 2022, but it was not brought forward. This was poor service from the landlord.
  3. The resident requested that the landlord escalate her complaint to stage two of its complaint procedure the following day, on 12 July 2022. This was not acknowledged by the landlord. The resident sent a further request to escalate her complaint on 20 July 2022. On 7 October 2022, the landlord sent a formal acknowledgement of the complaint’s escalation and confirmed it would write to the resident by 4 November 2022. The landlord issued its stage two complaint response on 4 November 2022. Had the landlord dealt with the resident’s complaint escalation at the time it was requested, the response would have been due on 9 August 2022, or 23 August 2022 with an agreed extension. The stage two response was issued 82 days after the escalation request was received. This was further poor service from the landlord as it has not given a legitimate reason for the delay and there is no evidence that it kept the resident updated or agreed an extended timescale for responding.
  4. In the stage two complaint response, the landlord acknowledged the delay and apologised for this. It also offered £50 compensation as a remedy. It explained it had been dealing with a backlog of complaints. The letter contained significantly more detail than the stage one response and represented a more comprehensive response to the resident’s concerns. However, the resident has indicated that a lot of the landlord’s information about the window issues in its stage two response was incorrect. The response did not acknowledge or remedy any shortcomings with the resident’s experience of stage one of the complaints process.
  5. The stage two response did go further to recognise and remedy the challenges the resident had faced in the past year. However, the issues continued after the stage two response had been issued. The next appointment had been confirmed for 18 November 2022. This appointment did not go ahead, nor did it go ahead on the subsequent re-booked date of 21 November 2022. The resident continued to experience missed appointments and her complaint remains unresolved.
  6. The landlord informed the resident in the stage two response that it would use most of the compensation award to pay off the resident’s rent arrears. It did not appear that the resident was aware she was in rent arrears. This use of compensation to offset rent arrears without the resident’s consent is not in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, which sets out our service’s approach to compensation. The remedies guidance states that compensation should be paid directly to residents rather than being offset against rent arrears. The resident has confirmed to this Service that she will accept the amount paid to remain on her rent account, rather than this being re-debited and paid directly to her. Therefore, the Ombudsman will not ask the landlord to pay the compensation directly to the resident in this case and it can be offset against the rent arrears in line with the resident’s wishes. The landlord should give residents with rent arrears the choice of how they receive compensation following complaints.
  7. This Service finds there was maladministration with the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint due to delay, lack of communication, a poor complaint response at stage one of its complaints process and a failure to remedy this poor response at stage two of the process. In line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, an additional compensation payment of £150 to recognise the impact of these failures on the resident is appropriate. This is in addition to the £50 already paid to the resident for the delay in the landlord’s handling of the stage two complaint. The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance suggests a total award of £200 may go some way to remedy service failures where there is some short-term impact on the resident. In this case, the impact of the landlord’s complaint handling failures was short-term as the resident was ultimately able to escalate her complaint to the Ombudsman.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was severe maladministration with the landlord’s handling of the resident’s window repairs.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration with the handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to apologise to the resident for the further delays in replacing the windows which occurred after the landlord issued its final response to the complaint.
  2.  The landlord should complete any required measuring for the windows within four weeks of the date of this determination;
  3. The windows should then be replaced within 12 weeks of the date of this determination.
  4. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident an additional £1000 in financial compensation. This payment should be made directly to the resident’s bank account within four weeks of the date of this determination. This Service acknowledges that the landlord has already paid £1000 compensation, with £859 being offset against the resident’s rent arrears and the remaining £141 paid directly to the resident. This means the total compensation offer should be £2000, taking into account the earlier compensation award of £1000. The additional £1000 compensation offer is comprised of:
    1. £40 for missed or incorrectly booked appointments, in addition to the £60 already paid;
    2. £680 for delay to repair, calculated at £10 per week from 28 days after the faults were reported in November 2021, in addition to the £120 already paid;
    3. £130 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident, in addition to the £720 already paid;
    4. £150 for poor complaint handling, in addition to the £50 already paid.
  5. The landlord is ordered to conduct a review of this case. The review should specifically focus on the ineffectiveness of the complaint responses in improving the resident’s experience and remedying the issues at the heart of the complaint. The findings of this review, and details of steps to be taken to improve complaint handling effectiveness, should be shared with this Service within eight weeks of the date of this determination.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord review the performance of its repairs contractors to identify areas where improvement is needed such as missed appointments and letting residents know when appointments will be missed. Where areas of improvement are identified, it should make an action plan for improvement. The landlord should ensure its repair obligations are being met appropriately via its contractors.