Housing 21 (202005322)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202005322

Housing 21

10 January 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 anti-social behaviour (ASB).

Background and summary of events

Background

  1. The resident has occupied the property, a 1 bedroom flat in sheltered accommodation, under an assured non-shorthold tenancy agreement with the landlord since February 2019.
  2. The resident’s Tenancy Agreement states at clause 6 that tenants, members of their household and their visitors must, ‘show proper consideration’ towards staff and neighbours and must not ‘do anything which may cause discomfort or annoyance to others or which causes a nuisance from unnecessary noise, unreasonable behaviour or in any other way’.
  3. The landlord’s policy for arranging management moves in cases of ASB states that:

‘Wherever possible action should be taken to stop the ASB and if necessary to evict the perpetrator. In cases of severe ASB it may be necessary to move the victim or perpetrator to another court especially where it is not clear where the fault lies.’

 

 

Summary of Events

  1. The landlord states that the resident has reported ASB by several of her neighbours since May 2020. There have also been counter-allegations of ASB by the resident made by her neighbours since this time.
  2. In July 2020 the landlord was shown evidence of the resident banging on her neighbour’s windows, shouting and swearing, and so on 3 August 2020 a formal letter was sent to the resident warning her about her behaviour.
  3. Following an incident on 20 August 2020, the resident wrote to the landlord on 24 August 2020. On 26 August 2020 the landlord met with the resident to discuss the incident. It also met separately with her neighbour, the alleged perpetrator. The landlord provided an update to the resident by phone on 28 August 2020, informing her that a letter had been sent to her neighbour advising that further incidents of ASB may result in formal action. The matter was closed after the resident informed the landlord that she was happy with the action it had taken. This was confirmed in a phone conversation on 1 September 2020.
  4. The landlord states that it subsequently met with the resident on 7 and 17 September 2020, 9 October 2020 and 2 November 2020, to discuss her concerns about ASB.
  5. The resident reported a further incident of ASB on 13 November 2020. The resident also reported this incident to the police, who discussed it with both her and the alleged perpetrator. The landlord liaised with the police in relation to its investigation and they advised on 19 November 2020 that no further action would be taken.
  6. The resident contacted this Service on 24 November 2020 to complain about her landlord’s response to her reports of neighbour nuisance. This Service discussed the resident’s concerns with the landlord and asked it to raise a formal complaint.
  7. The resident continued to report further incidents of ASB, including on 28 and 29 November 2020, and so the landlord arranged a mediation meeting with all residents involved in the dispute on 8 December 2020. The landlord subsequently received correspondence from the resident in relation to ASB by residents from 5 properties. All residents were advised to maintain distance from each other in the communal areas.
  8. The resident telephoned the landlord on 30 November 2020, stating that she was unhappy with the offer of mediation. The landlord explained that the resident’s desired outcome, that the alleged perpetrators be evicted, was unlikely to happen unless the issues were very serious and there was a breach of their tenancy agreement, which was why a mediation had been arranged.
  9. The landlord sent a complaint acknowledgment to the resident on 3 December 2020. The landlord stated that it would aim to respond by 9 December 2020. 
  10. The resident telephoned the landlord again on 10 December 2020. She stated that she did have a witness to one incident, a policeman, but he had not wanted to attend the mediation. The landlord re-offered the resident an internal move to another property with its own front door. The resident stated that she wished to report a further incident but confirmed that again there were no witnesses. She was advised to inform the Court Manager and that no formal action could be taken without supporting evidence.
  11. The landlord provided a formal response to the complaint on 11 December 2020. It outlined the history of the resident’s allegations of ASB by her neighbours and the actions that had been agreed in relation to recent incidents. The response detailed counter-allegations that had been made about the resident in relation to incidents on 28 and 29 November 2020, including that the resident had been verbally abusive and intimidating. The landlord noted that the resident no longer wished to be transferred to an alternative property within the estate and that she had indicated she would like to view a property in a different location.
  12. The stage 1 response referred to further allegations that had been made about the resident by her neighbours in relation to incidents on 9 and 10 December 2020. The landlord’s Court Manager had witnessed an incident on 10 December 2020, where the resident was described as ‘shouting’ at another resident and ‘very angry’. The landlord concluded that ‘most of the issues relating to ASB are being caused by [the resident]’. It stated that it had fully investigated the resident’s concerns and had tried to resolve matters between the parties, noting that it had a duty of care to all residents. The landlord warned the resident that if her behaviour continued it would be unable to offer her alternative housing and formal action may be taken for breach of tenancy.
  13. The resident telephoned the landlord on 17 December 2020. She stated that she was unhappy that there had been allegations against her and that she was unable to transfer properties. The landlord clarified that the offer of a transfer had not been revoked in the complaint response. The resident denied the allegations of ASB, stating that she was the one being harassed.
  14. The landlord emailed this Service on 21 December 2020, confirming it had provided a response to the formal complaint on 11 December 2020. It had also subsequently discussed the response with the resident by phone. The landlord informed this service that counter-allegations had been made about the resident’s behaviour and that she had been ‘notified that her behaviour is of concern’, in accordance with its policies and procedures. The landlord stated that it was prepared to assist the resident with a move to another property but that a move could be jeopardised by her behaviour. The landlord had discussed the situation with the resident’s support worker and arranged mediation. It was confident that it had followed its ASB and nuisance procedures. The resident had also been offered an internal transfer, which she had refused.
  15. Following further allegations and counter-allegations, the landlord wrote to the resident on 7 January 2021 in response to a letter she had sent on 24 December 2020. It noted that it had obtained statements from the relevant parties but ‘it is difficult to ascertain what took place when two parties are making different statements’. The landlord encouraged the residents to ‘stay away from each other’, noting that it had spoken to the other resident’s involved. The landlord encouraged the resident to continue to report incidents to the Court Manager and said it would contact her support worker about finding alternative accommodation.
  16. Following further contact from the resident this Service wrote to the landlord on 18 January 2021, requesting the escalation of her complaint or confirmation that the complaints procedure had been exhausted.
  17. The landlord contacted the resident by telephone on 19 January 2021 and followed up in writing to confirm what was discussed. The landlord also emailed this Service on 21 January 2021 to provide an update. The landlord stated that the resident had confirmed she was satisfied with the landlord’s verbal response and did not wish to escalate the complaint further.
  18. The landlord clarified to the resident that its complaints process considered the action or inaction of its staff in relation to the ASB and was not intended to address the ASB itself. The landlord advised the resident that it had a duty to investigate reports by other residents and it was difficult to take action if there was limited evidence and where there were counter-allegations unless there were independent witnesses. The landlord explained to the resident that she was still able to apply for a transfer to another property and confirmed that its staff and the resident’s support worker would support her with this.
  19. The resident wrote to the landlord on 17 February 2021 regarding an incident that took place in the communal laundry. The landlord responded on 23 February 2021, stating that it had spoken to the resident involved, who had denied the allegations. The landlord had reminded the alleged perpetrator that only one person was permitted in the laundry room at a time and advised them not to approach the resident. The resident was also reminded about her own behaviour.
  20. The landlord wrote to the resident on 26 February 2021 to confirm that she was on the waiting list for several other courts.
  21. The resident telephoned this Service on 4 March 2021 and this Service asked the landlord to provide a final response to her complaint by 7 April 2021, as she remained dissatisfied.
  22. The landlord telephoned the resident on 9 March 2021 and followed up in writing on 10 March 2021 to confirm the reasons the resident remained dissatisfied. The landlord confirmed that the resident was eligible for a management transfer, although a move would depend on her position on the list and the availability of properties. The landlord informed the resident that the formal complaint had been escalated. 
  23. The landlord provided a final response to the resident on 26 March 2021. It confirmed that:
    1. The landlord had responded to all the resident’s reports of ASB, including meeting with her to discuss the allegations and writing to her. In July 2020 it had issues a formal warning letter to the resident’s neighbour as a result of its investigations.
    2. There had been no witnesses to corroborate the resident’s account of the reported incidents and there had also been counter-allegations against her. ASB by the resident had also been witnessed by the landlord’s staff.
    3. Policies and procedures had been followed in relation to each report of ASB, including speaking with those involved and offering advice and mediation. The landlord was satisfied that the action it had taken was proportionate to the nature of the incidents, given the lack of evidence.
    4. The landlord reflected that it could have held more formal meetings with the alleged perpetrators, in order to investigate differing accounts of events. It could also have completed a risk assessment with the resident, which it acknowledged may have made her feel more supported. The landlord noted that this would not have materially affected the outcome of its investigation.
    5. The landlord offered £25 compensation in recognition of the areas where it felt it could have done more to support the resident. It also noted that it would continue to support the resident with a move to alternative accommodation.

Assessment and findings

  1. When assessing complaints about the landlord’s handling of reports of ASB, the Ombudsman’s role is not to determine whether ASB has occurred, or to make findings about the actions of third parties. Instead, the Ombudsman considers whether the landlord has adequately investigated the reported issues and taken appropriate and proportionate action in line with its policies and procedures.
  2. The evidence provided by the landlord demonstrates that it has responded to each report of ASB by discussing the resident’s concerns with her and speaking with the alleged perpetrator. Where the landlord felt that additional, informal action was warranted, it sent warning letters to discourage further incidents of inappropriate behaviour.
  3. The landlord acted promptly and fairly to address concerns raised by residents, which included following up on allegations made about the resident. Whilst it is acknowledged that the resident denies any allegations of ASB and feels she is being harassed, the landlord correctly advised that it has a duty to investigate all reports. It is clear that the landlord is working to balance the needs of several vulnerable residents and it has been sensitive and sympathetic to the resident’s concerns.
  4. In cases of a neighbour dispute where there is a lack of evidence to support formal action for breach of tenancy, the landlord is limited in the steps it can take to resolve the issues. In this case, the landlord has made efforts to gather evidence, for example by interviewing those involved, and when an incident was reported to the police it liaised with them directly about the outcome. The landlord reasonably concluded that no formal action could be taken on the basis of the available evidence.
  5. The landlord has demonstrated a genuine willingness to assist the resident to resolve the dispute by arranging a mediation session for all parties involved. This was appropriate given the nature of the incidents and the fact that there were multiple parties involved. Unfortunately this does not appear to have resolved matters but the landlord is not responsible for ensuring that ASB does not occur, or for maintaining relations between neighbours. The landlord can only be expected to take appropriate action in response to residents’ concerns.
  6. The advice provided in the landlord’s complaint responses is clear and sought to manage the resident’s expectations about the action it could take. The landlord also reflected on where it could have done more, which is in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles, to be fair, to put things right and to learn from outcomes. It also offered compensation as a way of acknowledging that it felt it could have done better.
  7. The landlord has gone beyond its obligations by offering to assist the resident with a move to a property where she would feel more comfortable. The landlord first offered an internal move, which was refused by the resident because she felt this would not resolve the issues. This was an appropriate and proportionate response, given the distress the resident was experiencing and the lack of available evidence to take formal action against the other parties. The landlord then used its discretion under management moves policy to offer to assist the resident with a move to a property in another estate. The landlord has been clear that this offer of assistance remains open.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s reports of ASB.

Reasons

  1. The landlord sent warning letters to the . The landlord has followed its policies and procedures, and behaved reasonably and appropriately by investigating each report of ASB, sending warning letters where warranted, arranging mediation, liaising with the police and assisting the resident in finding alternative accommodation.