Birmingham City Council (202330394)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202330394

Birmingham City Council

5 September 2024

 

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 reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB).

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord. She lives with her 2 children who are under 16 years old. The property is a 3-bedroom mid-terraced house. She has lived at the property since January 2016.
  2. The resident told the Ombudsman that ASB from her neighbours began shortly after she moved into the property. For readability the neighbours will be referred to as neighbour A and B in this report.
  3. The records show the resident reported ASB to the landlord in June 2019 following verbal abuse and threats of violence from neighbour A. The landlord interviewed the resident, provided an action plan, and wrote to neighbour A in June 2019. It closed the case on in October 2019 as there had been no new incidents reported since July 2019.
  4. To reduce the contact she had with neighbours, the resident was given permission to erect a fence along the front garden in September 2020.
  5. A second ASB case was opened in June 2021 after the resident reported issues with neighbour B’s CCTV. The landlord unsuccessfully tried to contact neighbour B in June 2021 before writing to them. It spoke to neighbour B in August 2021 who agreed to redirect the cameras. The landlord closed the case in writing in October 2021 as there had been no new incidents.
  6. On 25 May 2022 the resident alleged that neighbour B assaulted her cat. She said neighbours A and B shouted and swore at her outside the property. The landlord interviewed both neighbours, who denied the allegations and counter allegations were made. After viewing CCTV footage, the landlord was unable to determine who instigated the argument. It recommended mediation and a referral was made on 25 July 2022. The mediation went ahead in October 2022.
  7. The resident reported new incidents of ASB from neighbour A on 22 and 24 February 2023. The ASB included abusive gestures, verbal abuse, and parking issues. The landlord contacted both parties on 27 February 2023 and recommended mediation. Both parties initially agreed, but neighbour A later refused the offer on 20 March 2023. The landlord informed the resident on the same day.
  8. On 30 March 2023 the resident sought help with rehousing from the landlord. In her request she said that the ASB had been ongoing since 2016 and she felt unsafe returning to her home. She set out the details of the above incidents and said the landlord had not reviewed all the CCTV evidence she had. The mediation from October 2022 had been successful for around 4 months before the ASB restarted. She suffered with anxiety, depression, and panic attacks because of the ASB. She wanted the landlord to resolve the ASB and felt there had been no consequence to her neighbour’s behaviour.
  9. The landlord replied to her the same day and said that it would not support her request for priority based on ASB. It had investigated her allegations and was unable to substantiate her reports. It set out the evidential threshold required to take enforcement action against a tenancy. It recommended the resident record any incidents to substantiate her allegations.
  10. The resident reported a new incident involving neighbour B on 3 July 2023 to the landlord. She said that visitors to the address were walking across her drive and looking through her windows. She felt scared and anxious.The landlord made a new referral for mediation on 25 July 2023.
  11. On 22 August 2023 the resident reported an incident to the landlord. She said neighbour B had a gathering and children from the address were on her drive looking into her windows. The landlord called the resident on 8 September 2023 to discuss the incidents. It visited neighbour B shortly afterwards who admitted to raising their voice at the resident. They denied encouraging visitors to upset the resident. The landlord wrote to the resident on 14 September 2023 and said it had written to and spoken to the neighbour. It recommended that mediation be reconsidered by both parties to resolve the ASB. Its internal notes show that it considered mediation as there was specialist knowledge and expertise that may provide an amicable resolution.
  12. Both parties agreed to mediation and a referral was made on 14 September 2023. The landlord’s records show the mediation service spoke to all parties in September 2023.
  13. The resident complained on 26 September 2023. She said she was unhappy with the landlord’s handling of her reports of ASB. She was unhappy with the referral for mediation. She said that she had CCTV footage of the incident in August 2023 and had to call the police at the time. She wanted the landlord to take some action against the neighbours as the issues had been ongoing for several years. The landlord acknowledged the complaint the same day. It said it would issue its stage 1 response within 15 working days.
  14. On 5 October 2023 the resident reported an allegation to the landlord that her neighbour had threw an apple at her daughter’s car. She wrote to the landlord with help from the Citizen’s Advice Bureau the same day. She reiterated her concerns regarding the landlord’s handling of reports of ASB. She did not believe that mediation would resolve the issues. She wanted the landlord to review the CCTV footage she had and said other neighbours witnessed the incidents.
  15. The landlord’s records show that it consulted with the police in October 2023. It was told that the resident reported an incident on 26 September 2023 where an apple was thrown at her daughter’s car. It reviewed the CCTV footage and decided that it was unable to determine who threw the apple. There was insufficient evidence to justify sending warning letters or taking further action. It determined that mediation was the best tool available to resolve the ASB.
  16. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 13 October 2023. It set out its understanding of the ASB. It provided a summary of incidents reported from February 2023. It did not uphold the complaint. It said:
    1. It had consulted with the police and determined that there was insufficient evidence to issue warnings or take further action against her neighbours.
    2. It had recommended mediation in view of the lack of evidence.
    3. It believed that it had followed the appropriate policy and procedures.
  17. The resident disagreed with the landlord’s decision and asked for her complaint to be escalated on 16 October 2023.
  18. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 18 October 2023. It did not uphold the complaint. It recommended that the resident pursue the offer of mediation made in September 2023. It said that appropriate action was taken to resolve the ASB and it had acted in accordance with its policy and procedures.
  19. The resident called the landlord on 19 October 2023. She said that neighbour A had shouted and screamed at her. She was upset and believed the landlord had not viewed the CCTV footage she provided. She disagreed with the landlord’s offer of mediation.
  20. The landlord asked the resident for copies of the CCTV evidence on 13 November 2023.
  21. The mediator’s notes from October and November 2023 show that there was regular contact made in both months to all parties. It said that mediation concluded on 2 December 2023 but it would continue to monitor until 6 January 2024. The agreement made in December 2023 was for all parties not to shout and swear at each other or do anything that may escalate or provoke a situation. This included getting involved with issues not involving them.
  22. The mediator’s notes from 23 February 2023 show that initially all parties engaged with mediation. Neighbour B disengaged at the end of January 2024. The resident has since alleged that neighbour B continued to verbally abuse her.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. Although it is noted that there is a long history of ASB reports by the resident, this investigation has primarily focussed on the landlord’s handling of the resident’s recent reports from February 2023 onwards that were considered during the landlord’s recent complaint responses. This is because residents are expected to raise complaints with their landlords in a timely manner so that the landlord has a reasonable opportunity to consider the issues whilst they are still ‘live’, and while the evidence is available to reach an informed conclusion on the events that occurred.

Policy and procedures

  1. The landlord’s ASB policy sets out timescales in which it will respond to reports of ASB dependent on severity. For serious incidents including verbal abuse/insulting words, threatening or abusive behaviour it will make contact within 5 working days. For minor incidents such as neighbour disputes it will make contact within 10 working days. It will interview the reporter where it will assess risk, vulnerability, and agree an action plan that will be confirmed in writing. In all cases it will check its systems to see what it already knows about each party. It sets out interventions it can take including referrals for mediation, warnings, voluntary agreements, and legal remedies where ASB has escalated. It will review its cases monthly and confirm actions taken in writing when a case is closed.

Handling of reports of ASB

  1. In cases relating to ASB, it is not the Ombudsman’s role to determine whether ASB occurred or who is responsible. The Ombudsman can assess how a landlord has dealt with reports it has received in the timeframe of a complaint. We can also assess whether the landlord has followed proper procedure, good practice, and behaved, taking account of all the circumstances of the case.
  2. ASB case management is a crucial aspect of a landlord’s service delivery. Effective use of its ASB procedure enables it to identify appropriate steps to resolve potential areas of conflict and improve the experience of its residents. ASB cases are often challenging as options available or chosen by a landlord to resolve a case may not be the resident’s preferred outcome. It can become difficult to manage expectations. In this case the resident was unhappy with the landlord’s recommendations to pursue mediation, as she felt it had not resolved issues previously.
  3. The evidence shows that the landlord’s response in February 2023 relating to neighbour A reflected the seriousness of the allegations made by the resident. It conducted a risk assessment and action plan. It met with the resident and her neighbours to discuss and address the allegations. It was reasonable to seek to resolve the incident by mediation. Its actions were appropriate and compliant with its policy and procedures.
  4. The landlord was clear with the resident in its response on 30 March 2023. It was appropriate to explain the evidential threshold required and that the evidence available meant that it was not proportionate to take further action. However, it should have sent a case closure letter setting out the actions it had taken and the reasons it would close the case in accordance with its policy.
  5. The landlord’s records are unclear regarding its response to the reports made by the resident in July and August 2023. It had made a referral for mediation on 25 July 2023, which was a reasonable suggestion in view of the allegation made. However, the landlord should have systems in place to maintain accurate records of incidents of ASB. There were no records of interviews being conducted, risk assessments, or action plans. Good record keeping is essential to evidence the action the landlord has taken which then aids in its service delivery, enabling it to respond professionally when something goes wrong. In this case it would have ensured that there were clear reasons for its decision making, that could have been shared with the resident.
  6. The landlord’s response to the resident’s report on 22 August 2023 was broadly reasonable. It called the resident on 8 September 2023, which was around 13 working days later and not substantially outside its target 10 working days. The landlord also visited the neighbour to discuss the allegations quickly and set out its actions in writing on 14 September 2023. It appropriately sent advisory letters to the neighbour. It was appropriate to recommend mediation in accordance with its policy and its records show that it considered reasonable and proportionate action. However, there was no evidence of a risk assessment or action plan being produced at the point of contact. ASB can have long lasting impacts and in this case the resident said it had been ongoing for several years. The landlord should have considered these impacts in its risk assessment and responded accordingly. Had it shared its action plan it could have helped to manage her expectations and inform its own decision making.
  7. The landlord did not address the lack of action plans or risk assessments in its complaint responses. However, it did use its stage 1 response to address the issues raised by the resident. Its summary of events broadly reflected each of the issues raised by the resident. It was reasonable to show how it had determined what action was appropriate. It was fair to explain the evidential thresholds that were applicable and its reasoning behind its referrals to mediation.
  8. The landlord’s stage 2 response on 18 October 2023 also appropriately set out the actions taken and was reasonable to reiterate its offer of mediation. Its records show that it had consulted internally about the issue and was making the recommendation based on advice of its specialist officers. However, it did not address the resident’s concerns that it had not reviewed her CCTV evidence. It did not recognise that there had been reports without complainant interviews, risk assessments, or action plans. It did not show that it fully assessed its earlier investigations. This caused the resident additional time and trouble as she raised the same concerns in November 2023.
  9. Although there was a failure to address the issue in its complaint handling, it was acceptable to later ask for copies of the recordings.
  10. Overall, the Ombudsman finds service failure by the landlord in its handling of reports of ASB. The landlord maintained regular contact with the resident and made reasonable and proportionate decisions based on the evidence available to it. It appropriately relied on the tools and powers available to it to resolve the ASB. When it offered mediation, the referrals were made promptly. It was fair to assess the issues reported as a neighbour dispute and it broadly responded to each report in accordance with its policy. It was clear with the resident about its decision making and followed up its actions in writing. However, there was no evidence that it conducted risk assessments or action plans for each new case in July and August 2023. It did not set out any explanation why it did not conduct these assessments each time. Its failure to provide an action plan caused the resident additional time and trouble to pursue her reports. It did not address the issues raised about CCTV evidence in its complaint handling. The landlord should pay the resident £100 for her time and trouble.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of reports of ASB.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Apologise to the resident for the failures identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident compensation of £100 for her time and trouble.
    3. Provide evidence of compliance with the above to the Ombudsman.

Recommendations

  1. The resident has alleged that the ASB has continued after the mediation ended in February 2024. The landlord should contact the resident and discuss any new incidents and how evidence can be provided to substantiate the allegations.