Adur District Council (202109633)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202109633

Adur District Council

14 September 2022


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. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to:
  1. The resident’s report of the neighbour’s cat fouling and items left in the communal stairwell.
  2. The resident’s report of Anti-Social Behaviour by the neighbour’s grandson.
  3. The associated complaint. 

Background

  1. The resident owns the leasehold for a two-bedroom second floor flat in a purpose-built block, where the landlord is the freeholder. The neighbour in the flat below is a tenant of the landlord and has her grown up grandson residing with her. The resident is not recorded by the landlord as vulnerable.  
  2. The complaint under investigation here relates to the landlord response to resident reports about the neighbour leaving rubbish in communal areas and their cat fouling. It is also evident that the behaviour of the neighbour’s grandson was also a significant concern for the resident, though his concerns about how the landlord responded in this respect did not progress through the landlord’s complaints process and have therefore not been assessed here.
  3. The landlord wrote to the neighbour to remove household items and rubbish from the communal areas in January 2020. The landlord also contacted police for information at this time, with, it said, the intention of giving notice to the neighbour. The landlord logged 21 reports from the resident over the next year regarding the neighbour’s cat fouling, rubbish being left in the hallway and post being left on the stairs posing a trip hazard.
  4. A complaint response from the landlord dated 7 June 2021 said that the resident had complained about litter and cat fouling in the hallway. A Housing Officer had visited but no evidence of litter or cat fouling had been witnessed, but the resident was asked to provide evidence. The resident said that the problem continued and on 9 June 2021 provided 17 videos as evidence of cat fouling and photographs of litter.
  5. The landlord’s stage 2 response of 19 August 2021 said the neighbour had been written to three times, and a letter box ordered for her to avoid post being left on the stairs. The landlord said permission to keep cats may be withdrawn from the neighbour and could lead to court action. Internal landlord emails in December 2021 indicated that the neighbour’s cats were still in evidence although permission to keep them had been withdrawn. The landlord told the resident that it would revert in the new year and arranged for rubbish to be cleared. The landlord said it was liaising with police and a legal team to consider its next steps.
  6. Particularly detailed logs were submitted by the resident for the period from June 2020 in January 2022 regarding cat fouling, threats/noise and rubbish in communal areas. The resident has stated that the clutter in the hallway in July 2021 was still there five months later, the neighbour’s cats were still fouling in the hallway and the post box has not been installed. He said that his desired outcome is for the landlord to relocate the neighbour unless she stops letting her cats foul in the hallway, clears clutter from the communal areas and explain why his emails were ignored.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation and jurisdiction

  1. There has been no evidence submitted that the resident formally complained about the landlord’s handing of his reports of violent threats and aggressive behaviour from the neighbour’s grandson. There is a distinction between the reports of the threats which were made to the landlord over a period of more than two years, which are not something that would be investigated by the Ombudsman, and a complaint about the appropriateness of the landlord’s investigation into those reports, which the Ombudsman would investigate.
  2. The landlord’s correspondence from 28 July 2022 stated that a final complaint response had already been provided in relation to the resident’s reports about threatening behaviour, slip hazards and rubbish being left in the resident’s garden. However, this Service has not seen evidence of a final response to the resident’s reports about the threatening behaviour of the neighbour’s grandson. The final response under investigation here (19 August 2021) explicitly referenced the cat fouling and rubbish issues and these are the issues assessed in this investigation report as the Ombudsman will not normally investigate issues that have not progressed through a member landlord’s complaints process. This is in accordance with paragraph 39 (a) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. It is recommended however, that the landlord discuss this issue with the resident and, if appropriate, that it commence a formal complaint process.

Reports of cat fouling and litter in communal areas

  1. Section 11.5 of the landlord’s online ASB policy says that some incidents relating to animals such as allowing a dog to persistently foul an area, may be construed as ASB. It is reasonable to conclude the reported cat fouling would fall under the scope of the policy given the frequency and content of the resident’s reports. Section 10.4 covers environmental harm and includes the dropping of litter. In this instance, items left in communal areas including the stairs where they pose a slip hazard, would fall under the policy.
  2. The policy gives examples of the range of tools and resources the landlord may use to resolve ASB. Section 14.1 covers non enforcement tools, 14.3.1 to verbal warnings, 14.3.2 to written warnings, 14.5 acceptable behaviour contracts, 15.1 civil injunctions and 15.6 new absolute ground for possession. Section 18 details support for victims including updating, reviewing cases with victims at least once a month, 18.2.(m) says the most appropriate tools will be used to get the best outcome for the victim. 18.2.(n) says the victim will be advised of the outcome of the ASB investigation.  
  3. In this case, the landlord wrote to the neighbour about the items left in communal areas on 24 January 2020. Despite frequent reports from the resident concerning cat fouling and items in the hallway, there is no record of any further investigation or meaningful action taken by the landlord, bar an enquiry to the neighbourhood policing team, before the ASB final warning dated 23 November 2020 which was in respect of threats and noise disturbing other residents.  Repeatedly, the residents call logs were ‘closed’ by the landlord as it said, an ASB case was running.
  4. A letter was then sent to the neighbour by the landlord on 2 June 2021, just prior to the stage one complaint response, asking the neighbour to clear up items left in the hallway, including cat fouling. The landlord said failure to comply may lead to a breach of the tenancy and further action being taken against the neighbour.  Despite further reports by the resident, including video evidence, there is no evidence that the resident’s concerns were acted upon, or that he was reassured or kept informed of the ASB process as indicated in the ASB policy.
  5. The landlord advised in the final response letter in August 2021 that a letter box would be fitted for the neighbour to avoid post being left on the stairs to the resident’s home, but there is no evidence this was done. It said it had been unable to reach the neighbour in respect of the cats but would write that week to advise that the permission to keep the cat was under review and likely to be withdrawn.
  6. Although the resident then advised the landlord that the problems had died down and the landlord found the landings clear in September 2021, further reports were made of cat fouling and rubbish the following week and thereafter. Internal emails indicate the landlord had considered stronger action on the issues in accordance with statutory nuisance rules and the possibility of spraying cat repellent in the communal hallway, though there is no evidence this was acted upon, or the reason why nothing was done.
  7. It was explained to the resident in November 2021 that the landlord was satisfied the neighbour was not keeping her pets as she should, and they would seek possession if the withdrawal of permission to keep cats was breached. The resident kept and submitted further logs reporting cat fouling and rubbish in the hallway.
  8. Internal emails indicated that the landlord was aware it had allowed the situation to continue, when it should have spoken to the neighbour, put things in writing and reminded her of her expected behaviour. In early 2022 the landlord said it intended to meet with police and the legal team to consider the next steps, and in March 2022 the neighbour was again asked to remove items from the hallway.
  9. The evidence indicates that the landlord has been slow to respond to the reports by the resident, failed to act as allowed for in its policy and did not keep the resident informed of progress. The issue has not moved forward since the final response when the fitting of the letter box should have been quick and simple to arrange. Whilst it is appreciated that the issue of the cats is harder to resolve, it is unacceptable for residents of the block to have to tolerate faeces from the neighbour’s two cats inside the communal hallway for any period of time.
  10. As the landlord has acknowledged in internal emails, it has failed to deal with this issue in the appropriate manner, and there was a lack of focus on the resident and the effect that this ASB over a prolonged period had on his quality of life. It is fair in all the circumstances that the sum of £300 be paid in compensation, in accordance with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance for cases where the Ombudsman has found considerable service failure. This also reflects that the resident had to repeatedly chase the issue, there was a failure over a long period to act in accordance with its policy or engage with the complaint. The landlord should also investigate what has occurred in relation to the reports of litter and cat fouling and provide a written report (to both the resident and this Service), indicating what actions it has taken up until this point and including any timescales for future actions to resolve the issue.
  11. It is relevant to note here that the resident’s desired outcome was for the neighbour to be relocated elsewhere. This outcome is not a resolution that can be provided by neither the Ombudsman nor the landlord. The landlord is able to progress down a possession route through relevant procedures, as has occurred in this instance, though the ultimate decision to evict a tenant would lie with the courts.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s comments and complaints procedure 2014 says at section 8 that all complaints will be acknowledged within five working days, that stage one complaints to be responded to within 10 days and stage two within 15 working days. In this case no evidence of an acknowledgment has been provided. The resident stated the stage one complaint was made on 3 March 2021, but no copy of this has been provided by either party. This has made it impossible to see what particular issues of those mentioned were raised formally by the resident. It is not known if the response of 7 June 2021 was within the time scales quoted. 
  2. Similarly, the resident said that his stage two complaint was made on 20 May 2021, but again no copy of this has been provided by either party and this was prior to the stage one response, so appears in error. The resident did complete a ‘webform’ at some stage after the stage one response of 7 June 2021, but it was not date stamped and again, the landlord did not give a date in its stage two response of 19 August 2021. It is clear that in his email of 21 July 2021 the resident said he did not feel that the complaint was responded to in an appropriate or timely manner. This is effectively a valid complaint escalation and makes the stage two response outside of the 15 working day time limit quoted by the landlord’s policy.
  3. Section 11 of the landlord’s complaint policy says that a response should include a summary of the investigation, including the facts and the landlord’s findings, as well as an appropriate remedy or solution, which may include compensation.
  4. By neglecting to acknowledge the resident’s complaints, the landlord failed to provided reassurance that the issues had been heard and were receiving attention. In a case such as this with a large amount of correspondence from the resident, it was not clear that a complaint about the way the landlord had dealt with the reports made by the resident was in train, and what the next stage in the complaints process was.
  5. The stage one response did not acknowledge the resident’s considerable number of reports, including video footage of the neighbour’s cats fouling in the hallway, but rather said that on the occasion the member of staff inspected, the hallway was clear. The landlord put the onus on the resident to provide more evidence, instead of considering that which he had already submitted. It did not reassure the resident that any further contact would be made with the neighbour and said that the resident could ask that it be reviewed.
  6. The resident’s complaint was that the landlord had not acted on his reports of the neighbour’s cat fouling and litter left in the hallway, and the response did not respond to that. Given that the first reports made by the resident on these issues was February 2020, the response did not advise what had been done in response to these reports, but only said there was no issue when the landlord visited.
  7. The stage two response acknowledged the long time the issue had been ongoing, and apologised for this, which is noted. It advised a letter box had been ordered and that contact had been attempted with the neighbour, and that a letter as the first stage of the formal process had been sent. Again, it did not detail what should have happened in the 18 months prior and it offered no remedy or compensation for the inordinate delay in matters being resolved.
  8. It is fair in all the circumstances that compensation of £150 be paid to the resident in respect of the landlord’s failure to evidence that the complaint was processed in line with the landlord’s policy. This accords with the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies for instances of service failure where there is some impact on the complainant, which has not affected the outcome overall.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Scheme there was maladministration in respect of:
    1. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of cat fouling and rubbish left in the communal hallway of the property.
    2. The landlord’s response to the resident’s complaint.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 39 (a) of the Scheme, the complaint about the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of threats of violence is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

Orders

  1. The landlord to:
    1. Apologise to the resident, in writing, for the service failures identified in this case.
    2. Pay the resident £300 in respect of its lack of meaningful response to the reports of cat fouling and rubbish in the hallway.
    3. Pay the resident the £150 in respect of its failures in its complaints handling.
    4. Undertake a case review, at senior level, into what went wrong with its response to the resident’s reports about cat fouling and rubbish left in communal areas. Following which, a written report to be sent to both the resident and this Service detailing what actions have been taken in respect of these issues and including any timescales for any future actions intended to achieve a resolution on the case.
  2. The landlord to evidence compliance with the above orders to this Service within four weeks of this report.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord:
    1. Discuss the resident’s concerns about the neighbour’s grandson with him. If appropriate, a new complaint process to then be opened in this respect.
    2. Remind salient staff to acknowledge complaints, and to provide an explanation in its complaint response of the complaint investigation, and consider any appropriate remedy, in accordance with its complaint policy.