Abri Group Limited (202117971)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202117971

Abri Group Limited

19 July 2023

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 complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of anti-social behaviour, hate crime and breach of covid-19 restrictions.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident lives in a two-bedroom first floor flat on an assured tenancy that began in 2006.
Relevant parts of the resident’s tenancy agreement state that:
1. Everyone has the right to enjoy life in their own way, providing they do not upset people living near them. The landlord will help people solve problems and will take action when this fails, and the problem is serious. It will act very quickly in cases of harassment, victimisation or intimidation.
2. The tenant is responsible for the behaviour of everyone (including children) living in or visiting the property. The tenant is also responsible for them in the home, on surrounding land, in shared areas and in the neighbourhood around the home.
3. The landlord must give the tenant help and advice if it receives a report of any nuisance or harassment. It will look into the complaint and decide what action to take, based on the nature of the problem and how serious it is.
4. The tenant must do the following and make sure that everyone living with or visiting the tenant also does the following:
  1. Co-operate with the landlord and neighbours to keep any shared areas clean, tidy and free of obstruction. If the landlord needs to do this, then the tenant must pay the landlord’s costs.
5. The tenant must not do the following or allow anyone living with or visiting the tenant to do the following:
  1. Cause a nuisance to or annoy any person who has a right to live in accommodation the landlord owns or manages, and people who are involved in a lawful activity in or near that accommodation.
  2. Harass, interfere with the peace and comfort of, or cause offence to any people in the neighbourhood including tenants, members of tenants’ households, or tenants’ visitors, and employees, agents or contractors.
The alleged perpetrator is also a tenant of the landlord and therefore it is reasonable to assume that similar tenancy conditions apply as to the resident.
Some of the resident’s reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB) were during the period of covid-19 restrictions and part of the complaint relates to the resident’s reports that the neighbour breached these restrictions by allowing visitors into their home. The landlord has provided its ASB guide during covid-19. It confirms that, at the time, it was focussing on telephone and email contact with residents, and it would continue to be guided by its ASB procedure. It agreed to do the following:
1. Work with other agencies.
2. Signpost customers to its specialised victim support or its assessment and mediation service.
3. Signpost perpetrators to support services.
4. Increase contact with vulnerable customers.
5. Issue notices of seeking possession for breaches of tenancy.
The landlord has a hate crime policy, and it commits to stamping out all incidents and crimes motivated by prejudice and hate. It says that it will support, with its partners, any customer or member of their family experiencing a hate crime or hate incident and take robust action against the perpetrator.
The landlord’s anti-social behaviour and harassment policy commits to take all reports of ASB, harassment and serious criminal activity seriously. Upon report of ASB, the landlord aims to make contact with the resident within one working day of the case being logged. It commits to carrying out an action plan either over the telephone or, if required, during a home visit with the reporter. The officer will discuss the next stage of the case and the need to approach the alleged perpetrator. A vulnerability risk assessment will be completed in all ASB cases, an action plan will be sent to the resident as will diary sheets.
The ASB policy also refers to consideration of mediation and other non-legal remedies.

Summary of Events

On 16 March 2021, the resident reported via webchat that her neighbour had people in his home. She also said that when the neighbour is in the communal area, he spits when smoking. She said that she had already reported a breach of covid-19 regulations to the police and provided a police reference number to the landlord.
On the same day, the landlord responded via email and explained that covid-19 restriction breaches should continue to be reported to the police. The landlord confirmed that it had spoken with the neighbour at that time and no further action was taken.
The landlord has also confirmed that it liaised with the police who said that they visited the alleged perpetrator and gave an informal warning as they felt that this, along with education, was appropriate action, taking account of the neighbour’s individual circumstances. The neighbour apologised and the police passed this on to the resident.
On 24 March 2021, the resident contacted the landlord via webchat to advise that she had made a further police report against her neighbour for ASB, racial hate crime and breaking covid-19 restrictions.
On 25 March 2021, the landlord tried to call the resident to discuss her recent report but was unable to get through. It sent an email asking that the resident call back as soon as possible to discuss the recent allegations.
On 26 March 2021, the resident emailed the landlord to advise it that she had sent across her report to the police about the most recent allegations. She asked that the landlord start proceedings to evict the resident.
On 31 March 2021, the resident emailed the landlord listing the historic issues, including the allegations of breach of covid-19 restrictions and racial abuse that occurred in February 2021. She asked again that the landlord evict the neighbour.
On 13 April 2021, the landlord emailed the resident, asking for the name of the police officer dealing with the reports. It commented that, as the resident had reported a racially motivated incident, it wanted to investigate as soon as possible. The landlord explained that it was not in a position to consider an eviction, but it would fully investigate the incident. A meeting between the housing officer, community safety team and the resident was proposed for 28 April 2021.
On 28 April 2021, the meeting was held at the resident’s home, and she was advised to complete diary sheets to gather evidence. She was advised to contact the police if she felt threatened or intimidated at any time.
On 29 April 2021, the landlord sent the resident a letter to summarise the meeting and it confirmed the following:
1. Concerns were raised about damage to the resident’s vehicle, items being left outside of her door and parcels going missing.
2. It advised that there was no evidence to suggest these concerns were connected with the neighbour.
3. The resident said that she could feel someone watching her when returning from work. It said that whilst it understood her concerns, without evidence, it was unable to take the matter any further.
4. It enclosed diary sheets for evidence to be gathered and advised her where these should be returned.
On 11 May 2021, the landlord received completed incident diary sheets from the resident. These referred to incidents between February 2021 to May 2021, involving the neighbour and visitors during covid-19 restrictions. It also included alleged incidents of verbal and racial abuse towards the resident. The resident provided police incident numbers for some of the reports.
On 17 and 21 May 2021, the resident emailed the landlord requesting it evict the neighbour from the flat.
On 26 May 2021, the landlord tried to telephone the resident to discuss the diary sheets that had been sent in, but there was no answer. It followed this up with an email to advise that it had reviewed the recent pictures the resident had sent in which showed metal nails on the floor that she believed were put there by the neighbour maliciously. The landlord advised the resident that at that time, there was not enough evidence to substantiate an eviction.
On 30 June and 2 July 2021, the resident sent the landlord four emails asking it to evict the neighbour. She included the pictures of the nails on the floor outside of her flat. She also mentioned another neighbour who was experiencing issues.
On 15 July 2021, the landlord emailed the resident and explained that the evidence provided so far did not justify action to evict the neighbour. It said that it had liaised with the police who had confirmed they had investigated the covid-19 breaches and the verbal abuse.
In the same email of 15 July 2021, the landlord confirmed to the resident that the police had spoken with the neighbour about the language and words used and no new reports had been received from the resident. The landlord confirmed to the resident that if the abuse continued, she was to report this to the police. The landlord confirmed that no other residents had reported any issues.
On 19 July 2021, the resident emailed the landlord again, asking it to evict or move the neighbour.
On 20 July 2021, the resident emailed the landlord with a new crime reference number in relation to the neighbour swearing at her when coming face to face with her in the communal area.
On 23 July 2021, the landlord emailed the resident to advise her that it had investigated the most recent report and liaised with the police who advised there was not enough evidence or independent witnesses to be able to take further action. It confirmed that it believed the most appropriate step would be for both parties to take part in mediation. It suggested the housing officer and the police community support officer (PCSO) meet with the resident in person to discuss the issues and it enclosed further information about the mediation service.
On 30 July 2021, the resident emailed the landlord to decline the offer of mediation and advised that she would be happy to meet with officers outside of her home.
On 3 August 2021, the meeting went ahead with the landlord’s officer, PCSO and the resident outside of her home. The incidents were discussed, and the officers advised the resident that without substantive evidence, the landlord was limited in its actions and that it felt the most appropriate step would be for both parties to take part in mediation. The resident said she would think about the offer and let it know of her decision.
On 4 August 2021, the landlord received the resident’s complaint and acknowledged it the same day as a stage one complaint response. It advised her that it aimed to respond within 10 working days.
On 24 August 2021, the landlord sent its stage one complaint response to the resident and did not uphold the complaint. It confirmed the following:
1. The housing officer and PCSO had spoken with her about the incidents and based on the evidence provided, the landlord and police could not take any further action against the neighbour.
2. Mediation was recommended as the only suitable option.
3. It provided a chronology of the incidents reported and its response to each of them.
4. It advised that if the resident would like to speak to victim support, she should let the housing officer know.
5. It said that as part of the complaint, it had noted that the resident wanted a bodycam to record the neighbour. It confirmed that it could not grant permission or encourage the use of CCTV and advised that if she did make this decision, she would be responsible for all legal implications of using it.
6. It advised that if these were used, it should only be for her own legitimate personal security within the boundary of her home and not in any public areas.
7. It suggested she take her own independent legal advice to make sure she was aware of all relevant law and regulations to comply with legal obligations, and it gave further details of the information commissioners website.
8. It advised her to contact the police if she experienced any ASB and to continue to complete diary sheets.
On 1 September 2021, the resident emailed the landlord to escalate her complaint and on 3 September 2021, the landlord sent its acknowledgement letter.
On 2 September 2021, the landlord’s records show the local neighbourhood officer received a report of an allegation of an altercation involving the resident and a friend of the alleged perpetrator, at the entrance to the flats. This was reported to the police and counter allegations were noted. It confirmed that the resident had showed the officer a recording of the altercation – the officer had said that it showed the resident to be aggressive to the neighbour and his friend. The officer confirmed that no assaults were shown on the footage and no independent witness or CCTV were available. Both parties were spoken to about not engaging with one another.
On 3 September 2021, the resident emailed the landlord with details of new incidents and provided a crime reference number, pictures and a video.
The same day, the landlord officer contacted the community safety officer to ask him to review the videos and pictures.
On 7 September 2021, the community safety officer contacted the landlord to confirm that he did not feel there was evidence of racial abuse in the video.
On 9 September 2021, the landlord emailed the resident to explain that it had reviewed the video and pictures and there was no evidence of ASB, or abuse directed at the resident. It confirmed that if any criminal damage was suspected by the neighbour, this should be reported to the police and if criminal activity is confirmed, the landlord could then consider taking further action. It said that the police had completed a leaflet drop in the area to see if any other residents were experiencing similar issues, but the police had not received any feedback. The landlord reiterated its offer of mediation and details of victim support were given to the resident.
On 23 September 2021, the landlord emailed the resident advising her that it needed more time to review the complaint and that it aimed to provide the response within 10 working days.
On 4 October 2021, the PCSO emailed the landlord to advise that the police were receiving reports from the resident daily. It confirmed that the resident had agreed to mediation and requested that the landlord make contact with her. The PCSO confirmed that she had spoken with the neighbour in question who was very upset about the allegations made against him and his family.
On the same day, the landlord contacted both parties to ask for their permission to make the referral for mediation. It is unclear at what date this occurred, but the landlord has confirmed that it reassured the resident that it could arrange ‘shuttle’ mediation, where the mediator went back and forth between the two parties.
The resident emailed the landlord on the same day, to say that she had changed her mind about mediation. She also reported another male living at the neighbour’s home and listed historical issues she had with her neighbour.
On 8 October 2021, the landlord emailed the resident to acknowledge her decline of mediation. It also confirmed that it had dealt with the report of another male living at the address and that all historical reports had been dealt with by the police.
On the same day, the landlord sent the resident its stage two complaint response. It believed the two main issues were:
1. The landlord not taking seriously the resident’s concerns about breaches of covid-19 restrictions at a neighbouring home.
2. The landlord not taking seriously concerns about ASB from the same neighbouring home.
The response confirmed the below findings:
1. The housing officer had spoken to the resident about her concerns of breaches of covid-19 regulations and advice was given that it was a police matter and the resident needed to speak to them about the concerns.
2. The housing officer also discussed this with the local PCSO to ensure it was looked into and it was confirmed that the police did speak to the neighbour.
3. It confirmed that the covid-19 restrictions had been lifted and no further action could be taken against the neighbour.
4. It confirmed that it agreed with the stage one complaint outcome and that it had done everything within its policy and procedures around criminal behaviour, so it did not uphold the complaint.
5. It confirmed that the ASB covered a number of incidents from March 2021 to October 2021 when the resident did not feel her concerns had been taken seriously. It said that her preferred outcome was for her neighbours to be evicted due to their behaviour.
6. It said that the housing officer had spoken to the resident about her concerns. The officer had involved the community safety team and a joint visit was carried out at the resident’s home.
7. The officers advised the resident to keep a record of events and diary sheets were given to her. The housing officer arranged to speak to the local PCSO and both the officer and PCSO had spoken to the neighbour, stating that harassment was not acceptable and that the use of certain words and phrases were not appropriate. The neighbour was made aware that any such harassment, if proved, would be a breach of their tenancy.
8. It confirmed that it had received completed diary sheets along with photographs and a video from the resident. It had viewed these and it agreed that the evidence did not prove harassment or racial abuse.
9. The housing officer had spoken to the neighbour every time the resident had raised concerns and the more recent accusation had been denied. The landlord has not provided details of this accusation to this Service.
10. It confirmed that there were no witnesses to the allegations, and it could not take any further action, but it would investigate any future reports.
11. The landlord had recommended mediation and it said that it could be really useful to help resolve disputes such as this one. It gave contact details if the resident did decide to take up the offer.
12. It confirmed that the handling of the complaint could have been better as it said that it would respond in 10 working days, but it took longer, and it did not communicate with the resident and it apologised for this.

Summary of events after landlord’s complaints process

The resident continued to report incidents involving her neighbour and raised historic events up until June 2022. The landlord responded on each occasion, giving advice and advising her that she must report incidents of assault to the police.
In October 2021, in response to one of the resident’s reports, the landlord confirmed that it had sent a letter to all residents to remind them to dispose of rubbish appropriately.
In May 2022, the landlord spoke to the neighbour and advised him to be mindful of his guests in relation to issues that could affect his tenancy. A counter allegation was made regarding noise from the resident’s TV late at night. The resident denied this allegation and advised the landlord that she only watches TV a couple of times a week.
The landlord has confirmed that the offer of mediation and a referral to victim support remains open and it would be happy to arrange a meeting with the resident and mediator and also a separate meeting with victim support to provide additional support to the resident.

Assessment and findings

From the resident’s initial reports (March 2021) of allegations against the neighbour, the landlord has demonstrated that it acted quickly to respond, within one day in accordance with its ASB policy.
The resident’s report of hate crime which she said occurred in February 2021, was followed up in a reasonable timescale by the landlord, firstly by telephone but then when there was no answer, it sent an email the same day, requesting the resident contact it as soon as possible.
During mid-April 2021, when the landlord emailed the resident, it advised her that as she had reported a racially motivated incident, it wanted to investigate as soon as possible and requested the details of the police officer who the incident had been reported to. This demonstrated that the landlord took the hate crime report seriously and was prepared to follow this up and take action in accordance with its hate crime policy.
Whilst the resident made it clear that she wanted the neighbour evicted, the landlord managed the resident’s expectations from an early point when it demonstrated transparency and made it clear that it could not take this course of action without sufficient evidence.
One of the key principles in dealing with ASB is for the landlord to take a multi-agency approach. The landlord has evidenced that it appropriately worked with the police in trying to resolve the matter. It arranged a meeting with the resident in April 2021 with its housing officer and a PCSO in attendance. The landlord then followed up with a letter to the resident the following day to confirm the discussion that took place at the meeting. This served as a timely summary and action plan that set out clearly what it could and could not do moving forward.
The resident continued to request that the landlord take eviction action against the neighbour and the landlord appropriately responded, clearly advising her that there was insufficient evidence for this course of action to be an option.
During May-July 2021, the resident continued to report historic incidents to the landlord and new allegations that included nails on the floor outside of her flat that she believed had been left by the neighbour. The resident also reported abuse being directed at her from the neighbour. The landlord has demonstrated that it responded to the resident quickly and that it investigated the reports and liaised with the police but there was not enough evidence to pursue action.
At this point, the landlord suggested another multi-agency meeting with the police and asked the resident to consider mediation (albeit the resident later declined this offer). The meeting went ahead in early August 2021, incidents were discussed, and the landlord reiterated that the most appropriate action would be for both parties to take part in mediation.
When considering resolution of ASB, the landlord must demonstrate that it has carefully assessed and taken into consideration the full situation and incidents reported, before deciding on the most appropriate course of action. It is important that its action is proportionate to the evidence it has obtained on the case and the landlord has to consider its wide range of options, including tenancy warnings, injunctions, mediation and eviction (in serious situations where evidence is substantiated). Eviction is often a last resort as the landlord has to demonstrate that it has taken all reasonable steps to resolve the ASB, including offering support to the reporter and alleged perpetrator.
In this case, the landlord has worked with the police to try and resolve the neighbour issues and has obtained insufficient evidence to pursue eviction. The landlord has appropriately advised the resident that mediation is an effective tool to resolve this type of dispute, however, the resident has chosen to decline this.
The landlord has also demonstrated a support approach to the resident’s needs by saying that it was prepared to offer ‘shuttle’ mediation so that both parties did not have to meet in the same room. It also agreed to support the resident throughout as it recognised that this would not be an easy process for the resident.
In an attempt to obtain evidence of ASB and nuisance in the area, the landlord has confirmed that the police arranged a leaflet drop to residents in the neighbourhood, but it was unsuccessful in obtaining any additional information to support the case. The landlord also sent a letter to residents in relation to rubbish being left in the communal areas. Both actions showed its continued partnership working and proactive steps it was taking to try and resolve the issues and obtain additional evidence from other residents.
The resident requested a formal complaint and the landlord responded at stage one of its complaint procedure. It did not uphold the complaint and it set out a summary of its actions including a chronology of the incidents and the landlord’s response. It also advised the resident that she could speak to victim support and to let them know so that it could make the referral. This demonstrated that the landlord was taking a supportive approach to the resident and exploring the range of options available to it.
The resident escalated her complaint at the beginning of September 2021, and the landlord responded in early October 2021. It gave a comprehensive summary of its actions that included the housing officer speaking to the resident about her concerns, taking a multi-agency approach and carrying out a joint visit, continuing to accept evidence through completed diary record sheets and speaking to the alleged perpetrator about the incidents.
In summary, the Ombudsman can find no fault with the way the landlord handled the ASB, hate crime and breach of covid-19 restrictions. It has demonstrated a fair, transparent, proportionate and supportive approach to the resident in resolving the dispute.

Determination (decision)

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 anti-social behaviour, hate crime and breach of covid-19 restrictions.

Reasons

The landlord has demonstrated that it acted in accordance with its ASB and hate crime policy in managing the reports of ASB and breach of covid-19 restrictions by:
1. Adopting a multi-agency approach, working with the police in an attempt to resolve the reported issues. This included a leaflet drop of residents in the neighbourhood in an attempt to obtain additional evidence.
2. Exploring its ASB tool kit and offering mediation as the most appropriate option of resolving the issues.
3. Providing support to the resident by offering referrals to victim support and extra assistance during mediation and meeting with the resident.