London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) (202302981)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202302981

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

13 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 the resident’s move to temporary accommodation due to anti-social behaviour (ASB).
The Ombudsman has also investigated the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Background

The resident holds an assured tenancy of the property, a 3 bedroom house. Her tenancy commenced in 2007 and she lives at the property with her children aged 15 and older at the time of the complaint.
The resident informed the landlord that an ASB incident had occurred on 31 January 2023. The police told the landlord it was unsafe for the resident to remain in the property and the landlord informed the resident of her options to seek temporary emergency accommodation through the local authority. The resident moved into temporary emergency accommodation and the landlord accepted the resident onto its internal transfer list, explaining there would likely be a minimum of a 2 year wait. The resident later surrendered the temporary accommodation as she could not afford to pay the 2 rents. The resident has been “sofa-surfing” ever since.
The resident made a complaint to the landlord about the issue on 6 March 2023, in which she stated that she wanted advice from the landlord as she was still paying rent on the property she was unable to live in and said she wanted to be rehoused by the landlord. In its stage 2 response of 24 August 2023 the landlord confirmed the resident had been accepted onto its internal transfer list and said it had followed its ASB policy. The landlord acknowledged there had been a delay in confirming if it would suspend rent payments at the property to assist with the resident’s financial situation. It offered £1160 in compensation comprising £960 for distress and inconvenience and £200 for the delayed complaints response.
The resident rejected this offer and referred the complaint to this Service on 25 August 2023. In referring the matter to this Service, the resident said she was dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and she was still awaiting rehousing.
Since referring the matter to this Service, the landlord has confirmed it can adjust the rent for the period of time the resident was in temporary accommodation. It has requested the license agreement and proof of rent payments and has offered to honour this again in future should the resident choose to seek further temporary accommodation. The resident has said she still cannot afford to pay for the temporary accommodation so has not provided the requested information and has not accepted the landlord’s offer.

Scope of investigation

During the course of this investigation the resident has informed the landlord and this Service that she is unhappy with the offers of temporary accommodation provided by the local authority as she cannot afford to pay for it. For the avoidance of doubt, this is referring to emergency temporary accommodation provided by the local authority under their statutory duty to prevent homelessness and as such does not relate to any act or omission by the landlord. This Service cannot consider complaints which concern matters in respect of Local Authorities which do not relate to their provision of social housing. The resident may wish to raise such a complaint to the relevant local authority and escalate it to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO) in due course if required.
The resident also informed the landlord that her children were living with her mother and that it was having an impact on the whole family being separated from them for this length of time. The resident said that it was having an impact on her and her children’s health and wellbeing. The Ombudsman cannot draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. This would be more suitable to be dealt with as a personal injury claim through the courts and will not be assessed as part of this investigation.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of the move to temporary accommodation following the ASB incident.

The resident informed the landlord of an ASB incident that occurred on 31 January 2023 and the police provided a report. The police outlined that windows had been smashed, family members of the resident had been assaulted and there had been threats of death. On the same day, and on receipt of this information, the landlord:
1. Opened an ASB case.
2. Agreed weekly contact with the resident to monitor the resident’s welfare and to confirm if any further incidents have occurred.
3. Requested police disclosure to confirm if the resident was at risk remaining in the property.
4. Provided a supporting letter for the resident’s application for emergency accommodation to the local authority for assistance under section 183 of the Housing Act 1996 due to homelessness.
5. Completed an internal safeguarding referral and completed a risk assessment with the outcome of “severe”.
6. Organised for the smashed windows to be boarded.
7. Confirmed all of the above in writing to the resident.
The landlord’s actions set out in the previous paragraph are in line with the landlord’s ASB policy. In the days following the incident, the landlord also worked with the police to get a supporting letter for the application for emergency rehousing. The landlord contacted the local authority and provided all the relevant documentation to support the resident’s application for temporary emergency accommodation in the local authority of her choosing. All of the above demonstrates the landlord acted appropriately and promptly in handling the initial report of ASB.
The resident asked to be rehoused by the landlord in her initial complaint of 6 March 2023. In its stage 1 response on 6 March 2023, the landlord:
1. Confirmed an application had been made to its Priority Needs Panel who would determine if the resident would be accepted onto the internal transfer list for permanent rehousing.
2. Advised the resident to approach the local authority who were providing her temporary accommodation if she was no longer happy in the temporary placement.
3. Explained that the resident could approach a different local authority if she wanted to.
4. Confirmed it had no control over the local authority criteria for providing temporary accommodation.
5. Made the resident aware of her options to seek alternative properties through a mutual exchange.
The landlord accepted the resident on to its internal transfer list on 9 March 2023 and told the resident there could be a wait of over 2 years for a suitable property to be found. The evidence shows the landlord reduced the weekly contact to monthly contact at this stage as it was unlikely there would be any more frequent updates at this stage. These actions were reasonable.
The resident was dissatisfied that the landlord could not rehouse her faster and told the landlord on 3 April 2023 that she could not afford to pay rent on both the property and the temporary accommodation. The resident informed the landlord that she was in £3000 rent arrears and owed £400 for council tax at the temporary accommodation. For this reason, the resident had ended the tenancy at the temporary accommodation. In its stage 2 response of 24 August 2023, the landlord:
1. Confirmed it did not provide emergency accommodation and that this statutory duty remained with the local authority.
2. Said it appreciated the distress the resident must have been experiencing but that she would have been made aware of the rent charges for the temporary accommodation when she accepted it and it could not take responsibility for these additional costs.
3. Advised the resident to approach a local authority to seek assistance with her ongoing homelessness.
4. Offered to refer her to its Tenancy Sustainment Team who can provide advice on financial difficulties.
The information provided in the previous paragraph, though correct, was not provided in a timely manner. It is not reasonable for the landlord to have provided this information almost 5 months after the resident informed it she had surrendered her tenancy at the temporary accommodation. As soon as the landlord was aware of the resident’s financial difficulties it would have been reasonable to have signposted the resident to relevant support services, including its Tenancy Sustainment Team. The landlord could also have supported the resident with an application for universal credit or discretionary housing payment and could have offered to make contact with the local authority regarding the rent arrears. The landlord has failed to provide a reasonable level of support to the resident despite knowing the urgency of her situation and this is a service failure.
In the stage 2 response the landlord also acknowledged that it had previously told the resident it would consider suspending rent payments on the property while the resident was paying for the temporary accommodation. It said it could not find a record to show it had formally confirmed its decision on this matter to her. The landlord described this as unacceptable and compensated £960 for the distress and inconvenience this caused.
Where there are acknowledged failings by a landlord, as is the case here, the Ombudsman will consider whether any redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this the Ombudsman takes into account whether the landlord’s offer of redress, an offer of compensation, was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles; be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
The landlord acted fairly in acknowledging its failures and tried to put things right by offering compensation for the failures. However, the evidence shows the landlord did not confirm its decision regarding suspending the rent payments until 4 March 2024, a further 6 months following the stage 2 response. The landlord also has not acknowledged that it should have provided the offers of alternative support outlined above at a much earlier date.
It is unreasonable that the landlord took a further 6 months to make this decision and did not use its monthly contact with the resident nor its complaints process to formally confirm this. The landlord has not provided any explanation nor apology for the length of time it took to formally confirm the rent suspension. There was therefore maladministration by the landlord in its handling of this matter and an order has been made below in recognition of this.

The landlord’s handling of the complaint.

The landlord’s complaints policy states that stage 1 complaints will be responded to within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints will be responded to within 20 working days of receiving the request to escalate. The landlord responded to the stage 1 complaint on the same day as receiving it which is an appropriate response, especially given the urgent nature of the complaint.
The resident expressed her dissatisfaction with the situation to the landlord on 5 April 2023 but this was not logged as an escalation request. The landlord’s internal emails show it did consider the contact on 5 April 2023 an escalation request. However, the same internal communication shows there was some confusion around who should be dealing with the resident’s contact and the lack of ownership of this contact meant the resident was left without a formal response. The resident proceeded to formally request an escalation of her complaint on 24 April 2023 and the evidence shows the landlord still did not issue a response to this request.
This Service issued the landlord a Complaint Handling Failure Order (CHFO) on 17 August 2023. This was because the landlord did not provide the resident with a stage 2 response in a timely manner or within the timescales provided in our contact in June and July 2023. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 24 August 2023 and apologised for the delay in providing the response. The landlord has failed to act in accordance with its own policy and it should not have taken the time or intervention of this Service to prompt it to provide the stage 2 response.
In its stage 2 response, the landlord offered £200 compensation for the delayed complaint response. Its compensation policy outlines that the landlord will consider the duration of any avoidable distress and how it has communicated with the customer when making offers of compensation. The landlord was aware that the resident had moved out of the temporary accommodation and the resident told the landlord she was sofa-surfing and living in her car. It is reasonable to conclude that the 4 month delay in responding to the resident’s complaint would have caused her a great deal of distress. While the compensation offer acknowledged the failings in complaint handling, a higher award would have been more appropriate due to the level of distress incurred by the resident during this time.
In the initial complaint and escalation request, the resident informed the landlord that the issue was having an impact on her health and wellbeing as well as that of her children, mainly because they were having to live separately. As explained above, it is not for this Service to draw conclusions on potential impact on health however it is noted that the landlord has not acknowledged this at all in its responses. It can be reasonably concluded that this would have had a serious impact on the resident, and it may have been appropriate to have signposted the resident to support services through the GP or similar.
It is evident there has been a serious failing here in not providing the stage 2 response in a timely manner and had this Service not intervened, it is unclear when the landlord would have issued a response. For these reasons, this investigation has found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s move to temporary accommodation due to anti-social behaviour.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Special investigation

The Ombudsman completed a special investigation in July 2023 into the landlord using its systemic powers under paragraph 49 of the Scheme. It found the landlord responsible for a series of significant systemic failings impacting residents. This included a finding that the landlord was not following its complaints policy, failing to escalate complaints and not adhering to policy timeframes. The Ombudsman required the landlord to make changes including improvements to its overall complaint handling and approach to calculating redress. Many of the failings identified by this complaint mirror the issues noted by this investigation. As such, and in view of the age of this complaint, this Service does not make any wider order.

Orders

Within 4 weeks, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Provide a written apology to the resident, addressing the shortcomings identified in this report. The landlord must provide a copy of the apology to this Service.
2. Contact the resident to discuss referrals to support services such as its Tenancy Sustainment Team to offer support in applying for universal credit, discretionary housing payment and any alternative options available to the resident. The landlord must confirm the outcome of these discussions in writing to the resident and provide a copy to this Service.
3. Pay the resident £2080, inclusive of the £1160 it already offered in the stage 2 response, comprising:
  1. £960 for the distress incurred by the resident as a result of its maladministration in handling the resident’s requests for support, calculated in line with the landlord’s original offer of £120 per month from January 2023 to August 2023.
  2. £720 for the distress incurred by the resident as a result of its failure to act following its stage 2 response, calculated in line with the landlord’s original offer of £120 per month from September 2023 to March 2023.
  3. £400 for the time and trouble incurred by the resident as a result of its complaint handling failures.

Recommendation

The landlord should contact the resident regarding accessing her belongings as she raised a concern about having to replace her belongings that had remained at the property.