London & Quadrant Housing Trust — case 202523365

Decision Case ID 202523365 Decision type Investigation Landlord London & Quadrant Housing Trust Landlord type Housing Association Occupancy Assured Tenancy Date 29 January 2026 Background The resident has lived in a high-rise flat with her 3 children since May 2017. She has mobility issues and uses a wheelchair, as well as mental health conditions. 2 of her children are neurodiverse. In 2025, the landlord removed her from the medical transfer housing list. The resident complained that the landlord failed to consider the household’s health needs and focused only on communal lift failures and her mobility.

What the complaint is about The complaint is about the landlord’s: Response to the resident’s concerns about her removal from its medical transfer list. Complaint handling. Our decision (determination) We found service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about her removal from its medical transfer list. We found no maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling. We have made orders for the landlord to put things right. Summary of reasons Medical transfer list The landlord’s explanation of the reasons for the resident’s removal lacked detail and did not show how its policy applied to the household’s circumstances.

Complaint handling The landlord issued its formal responses when it said it would, keeping the resident informed of a delay and managing expectations. Putting things right Where we find service failure, maladministration or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction. Orders Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify.

The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set. Order What the landlord must do Due date 1 Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £200 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its response to the resident’s concerns about her removal from its medical transfer list. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. No later than 26 February 2026 Our investigation The complaint procedure Date What happened 24 June 2025 The resident complained the landlord removed her household from the medical transfer list without proper assessment.

She said that medical evidence showed the household needed moving. She disputed the landlord’s claim that her medical transfer request was solely due to the communal lift issues and said the lift continued to fail. 28 July 2025 The landlord issued its stage 1 response, explaining that its decision to remove the household from the medical transfer list was partly linked to the condition of the communal lift. It now accepted that this decision was based on incomplete information and apologised, acknowledging that it did not accurately reflect the household’s medical circumstances.

The landlord asked the resident to submit updated evidence for reassessment by the medical assessment panel. 30 July 2025 The resident escalated the complaint. She felt the landlord acted unreasonably by requesting a new medical evidence despite already holding this. She continued to dispute her removal from the list, which she said was wrongly based on lift functionality and failed to reflect ongoing risks and vulnerabilities within the household. The resident wanted immediate reinstatement to the medical transfer list.

1 September 2025 The landlord issued its stage 2 response and confirmed that the decision to remove the resident from the medical transfer list was correct. It explained that the household’s circumstances had changed since the original application. The landlord advised that reinstatement was not possible and that the resident would need to submit a new medical transfer application. It said any new application must include up‑to‑date supporting evidence, no older than 12 months, for consideration by the medical assessment panel.

Referral to the Ombudsman The resident remained dissatisfied. She said frequent lift failures restricted her mobility and that the high-floor location posed a risk to her son, given his mental health needs. The resident said her placement on the transfer list had been previously approved based on the medical needs of the household. She considered it unreasonable to be asked to reapply, believing the landlord failed to properly assess those needs. In December 2025, the medical panel approved the resident for a move.

As an outcome, she now wanted an apology and compensation. What we found and why The circumstances of this complaint are well known by the parties involved, so it is not necessary to detail everything that’s happened or comment on all the information we’ve reviewed. We’ve only included the key information that forms the basis of our decision of whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration. Complaint Medical transfer list Finding Service failure The resident said she required a medical transfer because frequent lift faults significantly affected her ability to access the property as well as the household’s safety.

She disputed the landlord’s position that the lifts were operational and said faults continued to be reported. She also said her medical transfer was approved due to the combined medical needs of the household and considered it unreasonable to be asked to submit a new application when she believed the landlord already held relevant evidence. The landlord maintained that removal from the medical transfer list was correct, explaining that the household’s circumstances had changed since the original application.

It advised that reinstatement was not possible and that any further consideration would require a new medical application with up to date evidence for assessment by the medical assessment panel. The evidence shows the resident was accepted on to the housing list in December 2021 but did not qualify for a direct let. In 2025, she complained that she had been removed from the list. Neither the landlord or resident have provided a decision letter confirming when or why this removal occurred.

Internal correspondence indicates the rehousing case was originally opened due to lift failures and later closed when repairs were completed. The evidence also shows that the landlord’s medical rehousing criteria had changed since the household was last assessed in 2022, requiring a new assessment supported by current medical evidence. In line with its housing and allocations policy, it was therefore reasonable for the landlord to request a new medical application where circumstances and assessment criteria had changed.

The landlord also acted reasonably by setting out evidence requirements, referring the matter to rehousing staff, and confirming that an assessment would be carried out by the appropriate panel. While the reasons may have been explained in the landlord’s decision letter to the resident, it is clear from her complaint that she did not understand them. The landlord did not clearly explain in its complaint responses how the policy had changed and why she was removed from the list.

This caused confusion and frustration and led the resident to believe she was being asked to resubmit information they already held. Overall, while the landlord followed the correct process in requiring a new medical application, it failed to clearly explain the removal decision and show how the policy was applied to the resident’s individual circumstances. In December 2025, the medical assessment panel approved the resident for a move, and she was reinstated on the medical transfer list.

The landlord’s rehousing team has engaged with the resident since that time. Complaint Complaint handling Finding No maladministration Following the resident’s complaint, the landlord acknowledged it promptly and advised that it would issue its stage 1 response by 14 July 2025. On that date, the landlord contacted the resident to explain it was unable to meet this deadline and required a further 10 working days. This was in line with both its complaints policy and our Complaint Handling Code (the Code), which allows a stage 1 extension of up to 10 working days, provided the reasons are explained in writing.

By doing so, the landlord appropriately managed the resident’s expectations. The stage 1 response was subsequently issued on 28 July 2025, as promised. After the resident escalated the complaint, the landlord acknowledged this in good time and issued its final response on 1 September 2025. This was within 20 working days of the acknowledgement and in accordance with its complaints policy and the Code. Overall, the landlord’s handling of the complaint was satisfactory. There is no evidence that the resident was treated unfairly during the complaints process.

Learning The landlord should provide clear written explanations when removing residents from medical transfer or rehousing lists, setting out the reason for the decision, the relevant policy criteria, and how the resident’s circumstances no longer met the threshold. Knowledge information management (record keeping) The landlord’s records did not clearly show exactly when and why the resident was removed from the transfer list. This lack of clarity caused uncertainty. The landlord should review our Spotlight on Knowledge and Information Management and its recommendations for accurate, consistent records.

Communication For the most part, the landlord’s communication following the resident’s formal complaint was satisfactory.