London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) (202405141)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202405141

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

6 August 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

1. This complaint is about:
   1. The landlord’s management of patio door repairs.
   2. The landlord’s response to reports of an ongoing sewage leak.

Background

2. The landlord is aware the resident is dyslexic. She told this Service she prefers communication by telephone.
3. The landlord’s records show that on 16 December 2021, the resident reported that the bathroom waste pipe was leaking through to downstairs. The job was marked as complete on 20 December 2021. The resident reported a further blockage in March 2022.
4. In April 2022, drainage contractors recommended fitting a panel to access the soil pipe due to repeat blockages. The resident confirmed this was fitted.
5. In October 2023, the landlord’s records show the resident’s patio door needed securing after a break-in. The door needed a new glazing unit.
6. The resident contacted this Service for support progressing her complaint in May 2024.
7. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 28 May 2024. It summarised the work orders relating to the patio door throughout October 2023 and said:
   1. It had arranged further patio door works for 20 June 2024.
   2. It had no records of the resident reporting a sewage leak within the past 12 months. It would attend the property on 30 May 2024 to investigate.
   3. The resident should claim on her own insurance for damaged items in the first instance.
   4. If she did not have an insurance policy, she could submit a claim to the landlord’s insurance team. It provided details of this.
   5. It offered £200 compensation comprised of £60 for the resident’s time and effort pursuing a resolution and £140 for the inconvenience.
8. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 21 June 2024. It summarised the repair history from October 2023 to date. It apologised that repairs to the door were outstanding for some time. It said:
   1. It repaired the leak on 30 May 2024.
   2. It completed follow-on work to the pipework boxing on 11 June 2024.
   3. The compensation offered at stage 1 was fair. It said this was still available to the resident.

Assessment and findings

9. Where a landlord admits failings, the Ombudsman’s role is to assess whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. The Ombudsman also considers whether the landlord acted in line with our Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.

Scope of investigation

10. The resident said the landlord’s actions impacted her health. The Ombudsman empathises with the resident. However, as this Service is an alternative to the courts, we are unable to establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action had a detrimental impact on the health of a resident. Nor can we calculate or award damages. These matters are better suited for consideration by a court or a personal injury claim.
11. The Ombudsman encourages residents to raise complaints with their landlords in a timely manner – usually within 12 months of the issue occurring. As the issues become historical, it is increasingly difficult for either the landlord, or an independent body to conduct an effective review of the actions taken to address the issues.
12. The resident has not evidenced the initial complaint she made to the landlord. The landlord told this Service that our correspondence dated 8 May 2024 was the first time it was aware of the complaint. On balance, we have considered events from May 2023 up to the date of the landlord’s final complaint response dated 21 June 2024.

Relevant policies, procedures, and laws

13. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places a statutory obligation on the landlord to keep the structure and exterior of a property in repair.
14. The landlord’s repair policy sets out that it is responsible for the structure and exterior of the home including external doors. It is also responsible for the fixtures and fittings for water, gas, electricity, heating, and sanitation. It will only redecorate following a repair where it has an obligation or in exceptional circumstances entirely at its discretion. It will make good any surfaces affected by the repair ready for residents to redecorate. The landlord expects residents to report repairs promptly and allow access to carry out the work.
15. The landlord’s repair policy explains it aims to complete routine repairs within an average of 25 calendar days. Emergency works will be attended to within 24 hours where there is an immediate danger to the occupant.

The landlord’s management of patio door repairs

16. Records show the resident raised a repair request for the patio door on 7 October 2023. The landlord arranged for its contractors to secure the door the same day. 3 days later, the contractors replaced the locks. Records indicate the landlord tried to arrange this earlier but the resident rescheduled appointments. The resident said these were temporary locks. Evidence shows replacement locks were ordered at the time of the appointment. Overall, the landlord attended to make the property secure and therefore acted appropriately in the circumstances.
17. Contractors did not replace the glazing unit until June 2024 – significantly outside of the 25-calendar day timescale set out in the landlord’s repair policy. As such, there was a failure by the landlord to complete the repairs to the resident’s door within a reasonable timeframe. While some repairs may take longer than 25 days to resolve, this should only be for complex repairs or in exceptional circumstances. That was not the case here. The Ombudsman is minded that the delays reaching this point were avoidable. This caused distress to the resident as she was concerned about the security of her home.
18. The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance (available on our website) sets out that compensation awards of over £100 are appropriate where there was a failure which adversely affected the resident. In the Ombudsman’s view, the £200 compensation provided by the landlord was in accordance with our guidance for the landlord’s failures. This sum was also in line with its own compensation policy. As such, the landlord offered appropriate redress.

The landlord’s response to reports of an ongoing sewage leak

19. The resident told this Service that she had reported a sewage leak to the landlord on many occasions over the past 2 years via telephone and the landlord gave her reference numbers. As such, this Service asked the landlord to provide a record of its telephone communication with the resident, such as an audit trail of calls. We also asked the resident to provide any evidence she had of these calls and reference numbers.
20. The resident did not provide further evidence to this Service for consideration. The landlord said it did not hold the call history.
21. It is vital for landlords to keep clear, accurate and easily accessible records to provide an audit trail of events. This helps the Ombudsman to understand the landlord’s actions and decision making at the time. If this Service investigates a complaint, we will ask for the landlord’s records. If there is disputed evidence and no audit trail, we may not be able to determine that an action took place or that the landlord acted fairly and in line with its policies. The lack of call records between the landlord and resident has impacted this investigation. This was a service failure.
22. This Service considers complaints based on the evidence available. While the Ombudsman appreciates the resident’s strength of feeling on this matter, there is no evidence to support that the landlord was aware of an ongoing sewage leak in the property. Records show a leak was repaired in December 2021, and blockages in the pipe were resolved in early 2022. There are no records of repair requests for a leak from May 2023 to May 2024. Further, the resident raised several other work orders during this period for other repairs and there is no reference to a sewage leak.
23. The evidence available indicates the landlord was first made aware of a potential sewage leak when this Service contacted it on 8 May 2024. The landlord made an appointment for 30 May 2024. Considering the potential risk to health, the Ombudsman finds the landlord ought to have treated this as an emergency and attended within 24 hours. This was a service failure.
24. Records show a leak was identified following the resident’s complaint. It is not clear whether the leak was water or sewage. Nonetheless, once the landlord identified the leak, it fixed it within a reasonable period. Records show the landlord stopped the leak on 30 May 2024 and attended on 6 June 2024 to board and skim the walls. This was in line with its repair policy, which states it will make good any surfaces affected by the repair ready for residents to redecorate.
25. The resident felt the landlord was responsible for damages due to the leak. It is not the role of the Ombudsman to determine liability for the resident’s damaged items. This would normally be dealt with as an insurance claim or through the courts. In this instance, it was reasonable for the landlord to direct the resident to her own insurer in the first instance to make a claim. It also provided the details for its insurance team should the resident want to make a claim on the landlord’s insurance. While this was fair, the Ombudsman appreciates the resident may find it difficult to navigate the insurance process in view of her dyslexia and need for telephone rather than written communication. In view of this, the Ombudsman is minded that the landlord ought to have considered any additional support it could offer the resident to support her in communicating with its insurance team.

Determination

26. In accordance with paragraph 53b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord offered reasonable redress in its management of patio door repairs.
27. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s response to reports of an ongoing sewage leak.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

28. Within 4 weeks from the date of this report, the Ombudsman orders the landlord to:
    1. Apologise to the resident for the failings identified.
    2. Pay the resident £100 compensation. This is in addition to the sum previously offered. The compensation is to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by the service failures identified within this report. 
    3. Contact the resident and discuss options for support in the event she wants to progress a claim with the landlord’s insurance team.
29. The landlord must provide evidence of compliance to the Ombudsman within 4 weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendation

30. The Ombudsman recommends the landlord pays the resident the £200 it previously offered, if it has not yet done so. The finding of reasonable redress is on the basis that this sum is paid.