London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) (202216912)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202216912

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

30 May 2024

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 the landlord’s handling of repairs to the ventilation system in the resident’s bathroom.
The Ombudsman has decided to consider the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

The resident lives in a 1-bedroom first floor flat and holds an assured tenancy with the landlord.
The resident reported issues with the efficiency of his ventilation system on 10 March 2022. He advised that he previously had a repair appointment booked which was cancelled at short notice.
On 21 April 2022 the resident raised a formal complaint about the landlord’s repair service. He reported that the ventilation system in his bathroom was working at 62% efficiency and only functioned correctly for the first 3 months following its installation.
On 12 August 2022, the resident contacted the landlord to add drainage issues with his bathroom sink and bath to his complaint.
On 23 August 2022, the landlord issued a stage 1 complaint response. In summary it said:
1. An order was raised by its contractor to service the ventilation system. Its contractor attended on 22 August 2022, and it was awaiting feedback.
2. It apologised for its delays to attend to repairs. It advised it was working through a backlog of repairs following the pandemic.
3. It would complete repairs as soon as possible. It had recruited further staff and increased the number of contractors it used.
4. It apologised that the level of service the resident received in response to his repairs fell below the expected standard.
On 13 December 2022, the resident escalated part of his complaint to stage 2. He said repairs to the ventilation system were outstanding and he felt the landlord’s response to the repair was inadequate. He advised that he experienced further failed appointments.
On 29 March 2023, the landlord issued its stage 2 final complaint response. In summary, it provided a timeline of how the repair had been handled, acknowledged its delays, and noted that the repair was completed on 9 March 2023. It offered a total of £300 compensation comprised of a £150 right to repair offer, £70 for time and effort, £40 for inconvenience caused and £40 for service failure.
On 30 March 2023, the resident referred the ventilation system part of his complaint to the Ombudsman. He remains dissatisfied at the length of time the landlord took to complete the repair, and that issues remain with the ventilation system.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

Following the landlord’s final response, the resident advised the Ombudsman he reported new repair concerns about a separate motor in the ventilation system. As this was raised to the landlord after its stage 2 final response, and there is no evidence that a complaint about this has exhausted the complaints procedure, the Ombudsman will not consider the landlord’s handling of this repair as part of this investigation. However, reference will be made to the matter.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the ventilation system in the resident’s bathroom.

The landlord’s repairs policy outlines that it will aim to complete “day to day repairs” at the earliest mutually convenient appointment. It adds that it has a responsibility to complete repairs to a good standard in a reasonable timeframe.
The landlord’s repairs policy confirms it is responsible for repairs to extractor fan systems in bathrooms.
Records show that the resident reported his ventilation system only running at 62% efficiency to the landlord on 10 March 2022. The Ombudsman would expect the landlord to raise a work order shortly after the repair was reported, particularly as the resident said this was not his first report of the matter. There were delays of a few weeks for the repair to be passed to the repairs team, however these were not significant. On 25 March 2022, the landlord updated the resident to advise the repair had been passed to the relevant team. This was appropriate.
Following this, records show no further activity from the landlord until the resident chased up the repair on 11 April 2022. It was unreasonable that the landlord failed to take any further action, particularly as it had an obligation to complete the repair. The lack of action and communication continued over the following months and led to the resident chasing up the landlord and raising a formal complaint.
The resident informed the landlord that the issues with his ventilation system was causing an excess of dust in his bathroom and mould was starting to appear on the sealant in his bathroom.
The Ombudsman notes that a surveyor inspected the ventilation fan on 17 August 2022 and recorded that having changed the filter, the filter light remained on. It subsequently raised a new work order. However, despite the resident having reported the repair 5 months prior, landlord records suggested it had not yet identified what repair was required.
The resident has since confirmed that he disagrees that the filters were changed by the contractor and stated he had changed the filters. The resident stated he had the filters ready and wished for the contractor to see how bad they had become in just 6 weeks which is why he had put in new ones.
The resident incurred time chasing the landlord throughout September 2022 and October 2022. Despite this, the landlord failed to provide regular updates to the resident. It advised in its stage 1 response that it experienced a backlog of repairs following COVID-19. Whilst this may have been the case, the landlord should have provided updates and an expected timeframe to set the resident’s expectations on when the repair would be completed.
The resident advised that a contractor attended his property unannounced in December 2022 to check the model number for the ventilation system. There was no evidence to suggest the landlord contacted the resident to arrange this visit, and no records of the appointment were logged. The landlord failed to adhere to its repairs policy where it should complete repairs at the earliest mutually convenient time. Further, it was another visit where the repair remained outstanding. This would have caused the resident to lose confidence in the landlord’s ability to resolve the matter.
The landlord assessed the ventilation system on 4 January 2023. During this visit, it identified a problem with the left-hand side motor and the need for this and the heat exchanger to be replaced. It added that the system was dirty and full of dust.
The Ombudsman notes that from January 2023, the landlord provided regular updates to the resident and apologised for its delays. Although this communication should have been consistent from when the repair was first reported, it was positive that communication with the resident improved.
Between January 2023 until March 2023, records evidence that the landlord chased its contractor for updates on the repair. The contractor said it was waiting for parts to be delivered and was unable to provide a timescale when they would be received. It was appropriate for the landlord to highlight the urgency of the repair to its contractor due to the length of time the matter had been outstanding.
Records show the heat exchanger and left side motor of the ventilation system were replaced on 9 March 2023. The contractor noted that the system was fully functioning before they left the property.
Overall, there were significant delays for repairs to the ventilation system to be completed, which would have caused frustration to the resident. The matter was exacerbated by the landlord’s lack of updates to the resident for the initial 9-month period following his report.
The landlord awarded the resident £300 compensation which accounted for the time and trouble incurred by the resident chasing, inconvenience caused by delays for the repair to be addressed, service failure and right to repair. The landlord identified each of its failings, offered an apology, and its compensation was in line with its policy.
The level of compensation is the amount the Ombudsman would award for failings where there has been a considerable service failure but there has been no permanent impact on the resident. For example, where a resident has had to chase a response or there has been a failure for a considerable length of time to act in accordance with a policy, such as to address repairs.
In addition to offering compensation, the landlord indicated what it had learned from the complaint referring to the need for better communication. It also noted it had increased its contractors. As such, the Ombudsman considers there was reasonable redress regarding the landlord’s handling of repairs to the ventilation system.
Since the repair was completed, the resident advised the Ombudsman that the ventilation system in his bathroom consists of 2 motors. He reported that following the landlord’s final response, the other motor has not functioned correctly, and filters regularly require replacing. He said the landlord has not completed further repairs as it was awaiting an outcome from the Ombudsman first. The landlord is recommended to contact the resident as soon as possible to complete any required repairs to the ventilation system.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s formal complaint

The landlord’s complaints policy outlines that a stage 1 decision should be issued within 10 working days from the date a complaint is logged. If a resident escalates their complaint to stage 2, the landlord should provide a final complaint response within 20 working days from the date of escalation.
It continues that all complaints (regardless of how many stages or case owners) should be logged, investigated, and decisions issued within 30 calendar days.
In this case, the resident experienced significant delays at both stages of the complaints process.
The resident requested to raise a stage 1 complaint on 21 April 2022. Following this, records show that the resident was not sent acknowledgement of his complaint. The landlord failed to meet its policy commitment to acknowledge all complaints within 1 working day.
Over the next 4 months the landlord did not provide any updates on its progress of the investigation, or reasons for the delay. The resident was left unclear on whether his complaint was being investigated. Further, it was unacceptable that the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response 4 months after the complaint was raised.
Records show that the resident contacted the landlord to escalate his complaint on 13 December 2022, 10 January 2023, and 17 January 2023. During each contact, the resident clearly requested for his complaint to be progressed to stage 2 and explained the reasons he remained dissatisfied. It was unsatisfactory that the landlord advised on 19 January 2023 that it was unable to respond to stage 2 straight away “due to a backlog”. The landlord failed to provide an expected timeframe to the resident. By this time, 30 calendar days had elapsed since the resident requested to escalate his complaint and a response should have been provided.
It is noted that the landlord acknowledged the complaint on 3 March 2023 and advised it would issue a final response by 29 March 2023. However, this update was 3 months after the resident initially requested escalation of his complaint. Further, it did not apologise for the delays the resident had experienced. The landlord failed to adhere to its policy timescales to issue its stage 2 response. This would have caused distress and inconvenience to the resident.
The Ombudsman does not consider that the landlord took sufficient action to put things right for the resident. It did not acknowledge its delays at stage 1 or stage 2 and failed to offer any remedial action to put things right. As such, the Ombudsman has identified maladministration regarding the landlord’s complaint handling. To put things right, the landlord is ordered to compensate the resident £150 for the distress and inconvenience caused through its complaint handling failings.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 53b of the Scheme, there was reasonable redress regarding the landlord’s handing of repairs to the ventilation system in the resident’s bathroom.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration regarding the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

The landlord is ordered to compensate the resident £150 for distress and inconvenience caused by its complaint handling failings.
The landlord should send evidence of compliance with the above order to the Ombudsman within the next 4 weeks.

Recommendation

The landlord is recommended to contact the resident to arrange for any further repairs to the resident’s ventilation system to be completed.
The landlord is recommended to reoffer the resident £300 compensation if this has not already been paid.