Yorkshire Housing Limited (202111360)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202111360

Yorkshire Housing Limited

3 December 2021

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 resident is complaining about the landlord’s handling of antisocial behaviour by her neighbour.

Background and summary of events

The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord and lives in a flat in a building with other similar properties.
On 8 December 2020, the resident reported, for the first time, an incident of antisocial behaviour to the landlord. She stated that her neighbour was banging doors repeatedly all day. The resident believed that these actions were deliberate. The landlord therefore asked her to provide it with the name and address of the neighbour on 9 December 2020, for which she requested a call back from it as she was unsure what to do. There was no record, however, of any further contact between it and the resident in relation to this incident provided by either party.
On 1 June 2021, the landlord raised a new antisocial behaviour case on behalf of the resident, for which it agreed to contact her about shortly to discuss further. Details of the case were reported to it by her via telephone on that date. The resident felt “harassed” in her own home. There was constant door slamming, which had been reported before, and she kept having other tenants in the flats banging at her door drunk asking her to stop slamming the doors. The resident reported that she was very scared of repercussions, unsure if she wanted anything to happen for these incidents, and was scared about her safety. The police were described as “always” attending the property, and she said that she also had recordings of the incidents available.
On 4 June 2021, the resident chased the landlord for a call back to discuss the new antisocial behaviour case and, on 7 June 2021, the resident contacted it again and said that, on the evening of 5 June 2021, a neighbour was kicking rubbish at her door and swearing at her. She then called it once more on 7 June 2021 with an update to explain that she was getting very anxious and felt “extremely intimidated” by the neighbour, for which she hoped that it would call her on 8 June 2021 and was recording her above reports.
On 8 June 2021, the landlord returned the resident’s telephone calls about the above incidents. The resident also raised a few additional issues about other residents in the block on that date. These included:
1. A neighbour from above who had come down to her flat, intoxicated, was shouting at her to stop banging her door. The situation made her feel uncomfortable, but she did not wish to speak to that neighbour at that point. Although this situation made the resident feel uncomfortable, she did not wish the landlord to speak to this person at that time.
2. Another neighbour had kicked paper at the resident’s door and was also alleged to have pushed past her on one occasion, so much so that she felt their bodyweight onto hers. She also reported hearing this neighbour swearing about her while they stood at their door and she left her flat. The landlord said that it would make contact with her neighbours and put these allegations to them. The landlord also said that it may need the CCTV footage of these incidents, which the resident stated she had.
On 9 June 2021, the landlord called a person living with the second of the above alleged perpetrators and put forward the resident’s allegations. In response they told it:
1. A piece of paper was kicked but there was “no intention to cause upset” to the resident.
2. That the neighbour had brushed past the resident so much so that she could feel their body weight onto hers was denied. The neighbour instead made a counter-allegation that, while carrying a child through the doors, it was the resident that “barged into” them.
3. That the neighbour swore towards the resident could not be confirmed, as the person it spoke to was not in, but they did not think it was something that the neighbour would have done. They explained that the neighbour liked to check the post on a regular basis, which was maybe why there was an increase of door banging, but they would have a word to see if the neighbour could reduce this. They also said they had a new seal on their door, which made it much stiffer to close, but they were not intentionally trying to bang it but rather that was the way it was.
The landlord advised the above neighbour to carry on not communicating with the resident and that it would speak to her with their comments on the allegations raised.
On 9 June 2021, the neighbour’s above responses were fed back to the resident by the landlord. She did not agree with what they had said, and she agreed that she would provide it with video footage of the incident of them kicking paper and swearing, although there was no video evidence of the pushing/barging incident that she still described as the neighbour barging into her.
On 14 June 2021, the landlord asked the resident if she had managed to find the footage of the neighbour swearing at her. The resident explained that she was more concerned with the allegation against her of pushing/barging into them.
On 15 June 2021, the resident forwarded some video footage of the above incident to the landlord. The resident said that she thought that the neighbour had sworn, and that they had done so on several occasions previously, while making sounds/noises towards her, with this behaviour towards her going on for over a year. The resident also pointed out that it could be seen from the footage that she did not push into the neighbour, and that she had been “utterly distressed because of this false allegation having been made against me by one of your tenants; I have not been sleeping, not going out and crying all the time.”
On 15 June 2021, the landlord called the resident and advised, having reviewed the above videos, that it couldn’t see any breaches and detailed its conclusions as being:
1. Her neighbour did kick a very small piece of paper, but the landlord did not believe it was intentionally at her door.
2. The neighbour glanced at her door very quickly before going into their flat.
3. While she reported that the neighbour brushed past her so that she felt their body weight, the footage did not show this. It showed her neighbour just walking in. They could be heard muttering something, but they had something in their mouth and was carrying a child. The neighbour appeared to be struggling to open the door, which may have been why they were muttering under their breath. When the resident came back into the building, her neighbour could be seen to speed up trying to get in their flat.
The landlord said it would write to both the resident and the neighbour asking that they avoid any communications with each other whatsoever.
On 16 June 2021, a letter detailing the above outcome of the resident’s antisocial behaviour allegations and case was sent out to her by the landlord.
On 16 June 2021, in a further email exchange with the landlord, the resident asked for an apology from it in writing, as she outlined that the video footage showed that she had walked straight passed and had not pushed the neighbour, which she would never do. She considered that it was a “very dangerous thing to do” to accuse her of pushing a parent holding a child. The resident explained that she therefore wished to make a formal complaint to the landlord regarding that. She added that her neighbour or the landlord ought to have involved the police in the incident, which she attributed to the neighbour’s “ill feelings” towards her that she described as being clear from the evidence that she had provided.
On 16 June 2021, the landlord responded to the resident by confirming that it had not accused her of but had asked her about her neighbour’s allegation that she had pushed them, which it confirmed had “been proven to be a false accusation” and relayed to the neighbour, together with her allegations about them. It also offered to assist her with and gave her details as to how to submit a formal complaint to it. On 19 June 2021, the resident further emailed the landlord about the above antisocial behaviour case outcome letter, and she expressed her concern about some of the information in this being incorrect, which she had written to it about.
On 19 to 21 June 2021, the resident wrote her following response to the landlord’s findings, which it treated as a stage one complaint from her:
1. The resident “emphatically disagree[d]” with the finding that her neighbour kicking the paper did not appear to be intentional or directed at the resident’s door. In her view it appeared to be both, and that there was “clear intent”, as they could be heard muttering something and appeared “angry/upset/disgruntled.”
2. With regard to the neighbour having looked at the rubbish boxes which had been left outside the resident’s front door, having reviewed the CCTV footage the landlord found that the neighbour glanced for no more than a second then carried on into their property. However, the resident said that they came very close to her door and, given their previous conduct towards her and verbal abuse, this behaviour made her feel very uncomfortable, and she wished them to not come anywhere near her or her front door.
3. With regard to the resident’s neighbour having brushed past her at the communal door so much so that she could feel their weight against her, which they denied and said that she had barged past, having reviewed the CCTV footage the landlord found that neither of these allegations were correct. It instead found that it appeared as though she let her neighbour through and they went past her to their front door, was struggling to get their door open while holding onto a child, and when she returned the neighbour could be seen quickly moving into their flat. The resident’s reaction to this was that the landlord was calling her “a liar”, and that she did not feel that it was taking her allegations seriously, as she had felt her neighbour’s weight touching her, and described them as clearly being heard swearing at her.
In conclusion, as the landlord did not propose to take any further action at that stage other than to advise the resident’s neighbours to avoid any sort of communication with her and for the resident to do likewise, the resident requested that someone else look at the evidence again in its entirety. She explained that this was because she felt that this seemed “wholly unfair”, she had “done nothing wrong – but they clearly have.”
On 1 July 2021, the landlord wrote its response to the resident’s stage one complaint. The landlord said that, having reviewed the video footage of all three incidents, it agreed with the above conclusions reached by the officer in that case and that it was unable to take any further action for this. It reiterated that the footage did not show either party brushing past each other and it explained that, while it agreed that the neighbour did swear and kick a piece of paper, the quality of the recording meant that it was not clear if the swearing was directed at the resident and kicking paper was not considered to be antisocial behaviour. The landlord also apologised to the resident for any misunderstanding, and if she felt that it had called her “a liar”, as it did not mean to do so.
However, the landlord appreciated that the resident had found this distressing after the allegations that it had put to the parties had been denied and it had closed her antisocial behaviour case, and so it offered her and her neighbour mediation to support them both to live peacefully in their homes. This was to enable them to discuss what had happened and to agree how they could both move forward, for which it asked her to let it know if this was something that she would consider.
On 6 July 2021, the resident’s complaint was escalated to the final stage two of the landlord’s complaints process by it, following her requests to it to progress this from 2 July 2021 onwards. She complained that it had “lied”, not investigated her complaint properly, made “false” accusations against her and failed to prevent her neighbour’s behaviour towards her, which had affected her mental ill-health and sleep. The resident added to the landlord on 12 July 2021 that it had failed to accept and address a pattern of repeated behaviour deliberately aimed at her by the neighbour, which she described as continuing because of its “unwillingness to act”.
On 2 August 2021, the landlord wrote to the resident setting out its final response at stage two of the complaints process. Having reviewed the video footage that she had provided to it, it said that it was not able to uphold the complaint because the footage did not provide clear evidence of antisocial behaviour, and therefore it could not take enforcement action for this as a result. The landlord instead invited the resident to report any more antisocial behaviour incidents or concerns that she had to it, for it to investigate and take action when appropriate.
The resident then complained to this Service that the landlord had not answered every single point of her complaint to it, and that she felt that she had proven her antisocial behaviour reports about her neighbour to it, but that its investigation of these was not professional or trustworthy. She therefore sought to receive compensation and an apology from it for this.

Assessment and findings

Policies and Procedures

In its complaints and compliments policy, the landlord sets out what a customer can and cannot complain about. At paragraph 4.3.2, the landlord does not consider issues of antisocial behaviour or an issue with other residents in the neighbourhood as a complaint. These are dealt under the antisocial behaviour policy and procedures.
The landlord’s antisocial behaviour policy defines antisocial behaviour as being “anything from low-level nuisance to serious violent or criminal behaviour. It includes all behaviour that impacts negatively on customers’ quality of life in and around their homes whether that is…late night noise and disturbance”.
The landlord states in its above policy that “Where antisocial behaviour occurs, we will respond quickly by carrying out interviews; seeking evidence; issuing warnings; seeking early resolutions through mediation; issuing formal cautions and taking enforcement action. We will communicate clearly to complainants, witnesses and perpetrators in a language and format appropriate to their needs. We will keep all parties regularly updated about progress of our investigations.”

The landlord’s handling of antisocial behaviour

It is not the role of this Service to establish whether someone has committed antisocial behaviour, but rather we will assess the landlord’s handling of the resident’s antisocial behaviour reports. We will consider whether the landlord’s response was fair and reasonable in view of all the circumstances, taking into account its own internal policies and industry best practice.
The landlord recorded the resident as making her first antisocial behaviour report to it of her neighbour banging doors repeatedly all day on 8 December 2020, for which it promptly asked her to provide it with the name and address of the neighbour on 9 December 2020 that she asked it for a call back to discuss. It is of concern that there was then no record of contact between the parties about this until she made a new antisocial behaviour report to it on 1 June 2021. Although the landlord sought evidence of the resident’s neighbour’s details from her to investigate this in line with its above antisocial behaviour policy, and there is no indication that she did so at the time to enable it to progress the matter.
The resident subsequently made further antisocial behaviour reports to the landlord from 1 June 2021, which she did not wish it to pursue at that time, and on 8 June 2021 that she did, when she accused her neighbour of three incidents of antisocial behaviour in particular:
1. Kicking paper at her door.
2. Brushing past her in such a way that she could feel their weight on her.
3. Using abusive language which the resident says was aimed at her.
In response to these reports, the landlord spoke to the resident on 8 to 15 June 2021, and to a person at the neighbour’s property on 9 June 2021 to discuss the above allegations, which the latter disputed. The person at the neighbour’s property made counter-allegations about the resident in respect of one incident, in which they attributed the brushing past to her having “pushed” the neighbour that it put to her on 9 June 2021 and that she challenged. The landlord then considered all of the evidence available, including the video footage of the above incidents that the resident provided to it on 15 June 2021, when it found that there was no evidence of any breaches that could enable it to take further action and advised the parties to avoid communicating with each other.
It was appropriate for the landlord to seek to talk to both parties about the resident’s antisocial behaviour reports, and to put the allegations and counter-allegations to each party, as it was required to carry out interviews and to seek evidence by its above antisocial behaviour policy. This is also because it had to obtain further supporting evidence for the reported antisocial behaviour before it was permitted to take additional action for this under the policy, such as warnings, formal cautions and enforcement action. The landlord attempted to do so promptly from the resident’s reports from 1 June 2021 by speaking to her about these from 8 June 2021, and to a person at the neighbour’s property on 9 June 2021, which was suitable and accorded with the policy.
Although it is of concern that there is no record that the landlord communicated directly with the particular neighbour from whom the resident reported experiencing the above antisocial behaviour, it may have been appropriate for it to have done so if the person who it spoke to at their property was its resident rather than that neighbour. This is because this could have made the person both responsible for the neighbour’s behaviour, and in a legal relationship with the landlord, which may have enabled it to have taken further action against them in a way that it might not have been able to towards a member of their household.
The landlord looked at the above evidence of the reported antisocial behaviour that was available to it, assessed this and drew the conclusion that, although there was some indication to support some of the allegations of paper kicking and swearing, the evidence did not amount to antisocial behaviour. It explained to the resident from 15 June 2021 that this was due to her video footage not demonstrating to it that either party had brushed passed the other, that the swearing was directed at her or that the paper was being kicked intentionally towards her door.
The landlord therefore advised both parties on 16 June 2021 to stay away from one another, and it also wrote to the neighbour in respect of their counter-allegation that it was the resident who had “pushed” them, which was not borne out in the video footage. The landlord additionally offered mediation to the parties from 1 July 2021, which was a reasonable attempt by it to resolve the matter, given the above disputes between them and its antisocial behaviour policy’s recommendation of this as a possible solution. These actions were appropriate because it was unable to find further evidence of antisocial behaviour to permit further action to be taken that the landlord could reasonably have been expected to do.
In handling these allegations of antisocial behaviour from the resident about her neighbour, the landlord therefore followed its policies and procedures, acted swiftly and with consideration to both the resident and the neighbour, and kept the parties updated and informed at each step. It also explained the reasons for its decisions to her at both stage one and stage two of the complaints procedure.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of antisocial behaviour by her neighbour.

Reasons

The landlord noted the resident’s antisocial behaviour reports, it spoke to the resident and to a person at her neighbour’s property, investigated counter allegations, and reviewed the evidence which included CCTV footage. The landlord also kept the resident informed at each stage of its investigation, and it wrote to the neighbour in respect of the brushing past incident where the landlord concluded that the neighbour’s counter allegation was not made out. The landlord gave advice to the resident and her neighbour, and it offered them mediation.
The landlord’s actions were reasonable and proportionate, and in line with its policies and procedures in respect of antisocial behaviour, and there was nothing more that it could have done under its antisocial behaviour policy in all of the circumstances of the case without further evidence of such behaviour.