Landlords can now complete the Complaint Handling Code Annual Submissions form. More information is available online.

Believe Housing Limited (202124486)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202124486

Believe Housing Limited

18 October 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 handling of the resident’s reports of antisocial behaviour by his neighbour.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The property is a flat. The landlord has a team called the Safer Neighbourhood Team, who deal with antisocial behaviour incidents. On 11 November 2020 the resident reported his neighbour’s antisocial behaviour (ASB) to his landlord. The landlord opened an ASB case the same day and responded to numerous ASB reports, which were mainly related to noise nuisance. The ASB case was closed with the resident’s agreement on 4 March 2021 as, at that point there had been no ASB incidents involving the neighbour since 3 February 2021.
  2. On 6 September 2021 the resident made a new ASB report to his landlord. The landlord’s notes say the resident said that although it was “not as bad as before”, the neighbour was smoking, slamming doors and had had visitors round till 3am who were shouting and slamming doors. The landlord contacted the neighbour who said it was a “one off “and would not happen again and that although his fire door was self–closing, he would try to close it quietly. The landlord agreed to contact the resident again in a month and advised him to contact it as soon as possible if the ASB got any worse.
  3. On 11 October 2021 the landlord contacted the resident for an update and the resident said that although things had improved in the days after it contacted the neighbour, he had started having lots of visitors again and that the previous night they were making noise till 4.30am, and that he had called the police on a number of occasions. The landlord said it would need to speak to its Safer Neighbourhoods team and would keep in touch with the resident.
  4. On 20 October 2021 the resident raised a complaint as he was frustrated with the lack of progress and said he wanted the neighbour “out”. This was addressed informally by the landlord, by opening an ASB case, agreeing to contact the resident fortnightly and explaining how the resident could download its noise app, to provide “hard evidence” in order for it to investigate further. The landlord also sent a letter to the neighbour advising him that it was investigating allegations of ASB against him.
  5. Following this, the resident made further reports of ASB, that were mainly related to noise nuisance, kept diaries of the incidents and made noise recordings. The landlord kept in regular contact with the resident, contacted the neighbour and issued a warning to the neighbour about the ASB and breaches to his tenancy on 14 January 2022. On 19 January 2022, the neighbour smashed a window in the block of flats and made threats to kill the resident. The resident made voice recordings and videoed the incident. Police were also called and began investigating the incident. The landlord made several unsuccessful attempts to contact the resident on 19 and 20 October before advising the resident and other neighbours that it would issue a final warning to the neighbour (which it issued on 18 February 2022.)
  6. On 2 February 2022 the resident contacted this Service and said he had complained to the landlord around July 2021, but had not received any written response to his complaint. He said that he wanted the landlord to investigate properly, take appropriate action and consider rehousing the neighbour. Following contact from this Service, the landlord registered a formal complaint on 18 February 2022.
  7. In its stage one complaint response on 9 March 2022 the landlord said that although there were ongoing ASB reports it was satisfied that appropriate visits and warnings had been completed to find a resolution and that its ASB team were undertaking appropriate investigations and action. It advised it was currently working with the police to investigate the recent incident. It said the ASB team had made a recent visit to the neighbour and discussed the allegations and the neighbour’s obligation as a tenant. It said once the police had concluded their investigations it would decide on appropriate steps to take against the neighbour.
  8. The resident escalated the complaint as he was not happy with how the landlord was handling the case and wanted the neighbour to be evicted. In its stage two complaint response on 25 April 2022, the landlord said it had been regularly contacting the police to confirm whether their investigation into the incident in January had concluded, and whether they had charged the neighbour (as this would support the landlord in taking action on the tenancy). However, the police had still not concluded their investigation. . It said before it was able to “go for possession proceedings” it would have to be confident that it could prove to a court that it had “acted in a proportionate and reasonable manner, and that all less restrictive methods of dealing with the issue [had] been considered” first.
  9. The landlord said in the meantime it had visited the neighbour again on Friday 22 April 2022. It confirmed that it had offered to provide security measures and support, both of which at that point the resident had declined. It advised the resident to continue to contact its officer if there were any further incidents, and that he could also contact the police directly about their investigation.
  10. The resident contacted this Service on 26 April 2022 as he said he did not feel supported by the landlord and felt that he had provided enough evidence for it to take action against his neighbour. On 14 June 2022 the resident informed this Service that the landlord had agreed to his request that a different staff member take over the ASB case. On 1 July 2022 the landlord issued a Notice of Seeking Possession to the neighbour. The resident has updated this Service on October 2022 to say that he was still experiencing ASB from the neighbour.

Assessment and findings

  1.  The ASB case that was opened in 2020 was closed with the resident’s agreement in March 2021 and his complaint in October 2021 related to lack of progress in the ASB case that was opened following new reports of ASB in September 2021. Therefore, this report will focus on assessing the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of antisocial behaviour by his neighbour from September 2021 onwards. Any reference to the previous ASB case that was closed in March 2021 is purely to add background and context, though it is noted that the closure of this case was in line with the landlord’s ASB policy which states that “In general, if there has been no contact made or any further complaints received within a 28 day period, we will look to close the case.”
  2. The landlord’s ASB policy classifies ASB as either “One day priority”, for issues such as threats of violence, intimidation/harassment, criminal behaviour and drugs and alcohol, where initial contact should be made with the complainant within one working day, and “Five day priority” for issues such as litter/fly tipping, misuse of communal areas and vandalism, where initial contact should be made with the complainant within five working days. It says that in cases of noise reports, the “reports will be assessed and allocated a response time depending upon the nature, frequency and severity of the nuisance being reported.” It also states that it will “ensure that complainants are kept up to date with the progress of their case, and any ongoing action or investigations” and that “Officers will agree a specific action plan with each complainant, including timescales for how often they would like to be contacted.”
  3. When the resident made a new report of ASB to the landlord on 6 September 2021, the landlord reacted appropriately and in line with its ASB policy by discussing the issue with the resident that day. It also took appropriate steps to speak with the neighbour that day, and the neighbour had said it was a one off incident. In view of this, it was reasonable for the landlord to offer to contact the resident in a month’s time, whilst confirming he could contact the landlord it if the problem escalated. The landlord contacted the resident as agreed, one month later and, when the resident advised it that the ASB issues had returned the landlord acted appropriately by advising it would speak to its Safer Neighbourhoods team and would “stay in touch” with the resident. However, the landlord’s notes from that conversation do not specify exactly when it would be in touch with the resident and it is not clear if the landlord gave the resident a timescale for contact, which would have been helpful and in line with its ASB policy.
  4. The landlord’s complaints leaflet states “Our complaints process has two stages, though you may not need to use either of them” as it also has an informal stage called “Own it, Sort it” where it aims to resolve “issues at first point of contact, without the need for a formal investigation.”  Therefore, when the resident raised a complaint on 20 October 2021 about lack of progress in the ASB case, and that he wanted the neighbour “out”, this Service considers it reasonable that the landlord responded to this issue informally in the first instance. This Service also considers that the actions the landlord took to address the complaint were appropriate, as it opened an ASB case, explained to the resident how to use it noise app, to provide “hard evidence” in order for it to investigate further and agreed to contact the resident on a fortnightly basis. It also sent a letter to the neighbour advising him that it was investigating allegations of ASB against him. It attempted to manage the resident’s expectations by explaining that there would not be a “quick resolution” as it needed to carry out investigations. This was in line with its ASB policy which states that “. Staff will provide realistic advice from the outset about what action we may be able to take, the level of evidence that will be required, and possible timescales”.
  5. The landlord’s complaints policy states that “All formal complaints will be formally responded to in writing”. As the issue was dealt with informally, it was reasonable that the landlord did not respond in writing at that time. However, it would have been helpful if the landlord had explained to the resident that he would not be receiving a written response, as the lack of written response was part of the reason he approached this Service in February 2022.  This Service will be recommending that going forward, the landlord advises residents that they will not receive a written response to issues that it deals with informally, and considers adding that information to its complaint leaflet too.
  6. When the neighbour made threats to kill the resident in January 2022, the landlord responded appropriately by attempting to contact the resident the day of the report and by informing the resident and his other neighbours that it would be issuing a final warning to the neighbour responsible for the ASB. It also liaised with the police and contacted them regularly for updates.
  7. In its complaint responses the landlord took appropriate steps to explain that although it acknowledged the distress the ASB was causing the resident, it could not just evict the neighbour (as the resident requested) as there were specific processes it had to follow in this situation. This was reasonable as, as outlined in its ASB policy, a “Possession Order is a civil order which is granted in a County Court, where ASB is serious and persistent and where all appropriate methods of resolution have been tried but have been unsuccessful. “. Eviction should be seen as a last resort and in line with this landlords need to be able to show the court that they have tried to resolve the issue in other ways first before pursuing legal action. It was also appropriate that the landlord waited to find out the outcome of the police investigations into the threats to kill, before deciding what action it would take. Whilst landlords are expected to cooperate with police investigations they must ensure that they do not interfere with an active investigation and taking legal action to evict a tenant could risk interfering with an investigation. Also, the outcome of the police investigation could add evidence to the landlord’s eviction case for the landlord to present to the court.
  8. It is noted that following the end of its internal complaints process, the landlord took appropriate steps to seek a notice of possession against the neighbour on 1 July 2022. As the resident informed this Service in October 2022, that the ASB is continuing, the Ombudsman will be recommending that the landlord continue to provide regular updates to the resident of the action it is taking to resolve the ASB, to restate its offer to provide support and/or security measures to the resident. Although this Service appreciates the distress caused to the resident by his neighbour’s ASB, and the frustration of having to wait whilst the landlord follows the appropriate processes to address the ASB, this Service has found no evidence of any maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s reports of antisocial behaviour by his neighbour.

 

 

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s reports of antisocial behaviour by his neighbour.

Orders and recommendations

  1. The landlord is recommended to continue to regularly update the resident of the actions it is taking regarding his ASB reports and to confirm whether he requires any additional support or any additional security measures to be implemented.
  2. The landlord is recommended in future, to inform residents that they will not receive a written response to complaint issues that it deals with informally and to consider updating its complaints leaflet and complaints information online to reflect this.