LiveWest Homes Limited (202014223)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202014223

LiveWest Homes Limited

28 February 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

1. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident concerning its handling of antisocial behaviour (‘ASB’) reports.

Background and summary of events

Background

2. The resident was a ‘general needs’ tenant of the landlord from 2011 until September 2022, when he was evicted following granting of an eviction order by the county court. The property is a flat in a block. The resident is trans, autistic and was in receipt of support from advocates and a social worker in the course of the complaint.
3. Under the tenancy agreement, tenants agree not to act or behave in ways which cause, or are likely to cause, alarm or distress. The tenancy agreement also states that any notice under the terms of the tenancy will be served to the address by post or by hand, and that grounds for possession included nuisance and ASB at the property or in the vicinity.
4. The landlord’s ASB and hate crime policy confirms that it aims to take proportionate action to resolve ASB; use intervention tools such as warnings and acceptable behaviour contracts; and work with multiple agencies. It aims to minimise homelessness, seeks to challenge and change behaviours using tenancy sustainment and tools available, and only considers eviction as a last resort and when ASB is of a serious nature or where other action has been unsuccessful. If someone is vulnerable, it aims to give appropriate support and make safeguarding referrals where necessary, and if the police have assessed something to be a hate crime, it works with the police to take appropriate action.
5. The landlord’s vulnerable customers policy confirms that it aims to take account of vulnerable residents by making referrals to its tenancy sustainment team; carrying out Equality Act assessments before legal action; engaging in ‘best interests’ meetings; and making referrals to safeguarding or other relevant support, which customers are expected to engage with. It also aims to give regard to any known risks when making decisions such as commencement of legal proceedings, and these are aimed to be reasonable and proportionate.
6. The landlord operates a two stage complaints procedure, in which it responds within five working days at stage one, and responds within twelve working days at stage two, although these may be longer if agreed with the complainant.

Summary of events

7. The information provided indicates there may be a history of infrequent ASB allegations at the block, however we have only been supplied records from 2020, from when matters escalated.
8. From early 2020, the evidence shows that the resident made reports about neighbours that included noise; bullying; drug dealing; lack of social distancing; assault; theft; damage to property; threats of violence; making weapons; arranging for him to be beaten up; and discrimination and hate crime. In response to these, the landlord took action such as discussed the issues internally and with the police, mental health services and the local authority; discussed issues with the resident and his neighbours; advised the resident to report certain issues to the police; sent letters to remind residents of its no drugs policy and to socially distance; and encouraged signing of good behaviour agreements.
9. The information provided also shows that from 2020, the landlord was also in receipt of reports of antisocial behaviour (‘ASB’) about the resident in the block and in the locality, which were discussed with the resident and multiple agencies such as the police, mental health services, and the local authority. The landlord considered different versions of events for the reports against the resident, which included his accounts and his counter-allegations he made, and the reports against the resident were the subject of further action from the landlord. In addition to this, there is reference to his facing separate court charges, and the police and the local authority issuing him with community protection warnings.
10. The information provided shows that on a number of occasions, the resident expressed distress about allegations against him and counter allegations he made. As a consequence, there were safeguarding concerns about him which the landlord monitored and discussed with multiple agencies to ensure welfare checks were carried out. The landlord generally updated adult safeguarding about any actions it took such as give warnings to the resident. The landlord also referred the resident to its tenancy support service, which visited him and discussed support outside of support he was already receiving, although it notes that support offered by itself and adult social care was not taken up. There were also concerns expressed about the resident’s safety by representatives, who requested in September 2020 for CCTV to be installed at the block, which the landlord did not agree to as it wanted to explore alternative solutions at that time.
11. The information provided shows that ongoing reports about the resident led to him being visited by the landlord, the police and the local authority on 29 October 2020, when he was asked to sign multiple acceptable behaviour contracts that covered behaviour at the block, in public and his contact with emergency services. These followed discussion with multiple agencies and a risk assessment. The landlord’s records show that prior to this visit, the resident was provided a draft copy of its contract; informed that it intended to visit with the police and the local authority for him to sign it; and informed that it would serve an unacceptable behaviour notice and may take further enforcement action if he did not sign it and continued to breach his tenancy terms.
12. The resident subsequently signed the landlord’s acceptable behaviour contract on 14 February 2021. This was after the landlord had chased him to sign this in December 2020 and January 2021 after further reports; after the landlord had had discussions with multiple agencies and his advocate about how best to communicate with him; and after he had been warned that application to court for a civil injunction was being considered.
13. On 16 February 2021, the resident copied this Service into an email to the landlord and many other parties. He said that he had been bullied into signing the acceptable behaviour contract, and the landlord and the police had breached human rights and disability laws. He raised dissatisfaction that individuals turned up to serve the contract without any warning, knowing he had been previously attacked, and he advised that the visit had led him to attempt suicide (it is understood this refers to the 29 October 2020 visit). He raised concern that future discrimination from the landlord, the police, fellow tenants and others in the town may lead him to another suicide attempt. He said that he had attempted to complain about drugs, social distancing breaches, malicious communications and verbal and physical attacks against him, and the landlord, the police and the local authority had failed in their duty to protect him.
14. In March 2021, the information provided shows that there were further allegations and counter allegations at the block, and the landlord agreed that CCTV should be installed at the block so that it could ascertain the true facts for any future incidents (this was not installed until September 2021).
15. On 24 March 2021, the landlord wrote to the resident in a letter that was handed to him by mental health services. The landlord noted how it had discussed and implemented the acceptable behaviour contract, and that further recent reports may mean he was in breach of this. It noted that it was liaising with the police and local authority and was considering further enforcement action. It asked him to familiarise himself with the terms of the agreement and to stop specific types of behaviour. It provided its details to discuss matters.
16. On 16 April 2021, this Service contacted the landlord, after which it raised a formal complaint and discussed this with the resident on 28 April 2021. It noted that he felt it had taken complaints against him at face value, and not asked for his version of events. It noted that he also felt his autism had been overlooked when letters had been sent to him about tenancy breaches and court action, as he needed to be pre-warned.
17. On 12 May 2021, after agreeing extensions with the resident, the landlord issued its stage one response.
    1. It noted it had discussed the complaint with the resident by phone and it thanked him for allowing more time for its investigation, which it noted had involved a review of the management of the case with several members of staff, an assessment of the case file, and a review of its policies.
    2. It noted that the resident said he did not feel his autism had been taken into account when dealing with ASB-related matters. It advised that assessing the information, it had been dealing with ASB issues since October 2020 and had adopted a multi-agency approach in this time, with records showing regular communication with adult safeguarding, the NHS, an advocacy service, the police and the local authority. It noted that he was also referred to its tenancy sustainment service. It explained that it had taken on board suggestions from other agencies in its approach, and it advised that it would be happy to discuss other ways he or his advocate felt his autism could be taken into account.
    3. It noted that the resident was of the view that ASB against him had not been investigated properly and taken at face value. It said it did not accept this and that its records showed liaison with the other agencies and him to explore allegations against him in respect to ASB. It noted that its 24 March 2021 correspondence about an alleged incident invited him to contact it to discuss the matter.
    4. It noted that the resident mentioned things were quieter inside and outside of the block, and it advised that it hoped that this remained the case as this would only be beneficial to all parties.
    5. It concluded that it did not uphold the complaint but it noted that it had identified some learning points. It noted that it was dealing with an increased number of autistic customers and acknowledged that it would be beneficial for it to explore staff autism awareness training. It also noted that it needed to make customers more aware of how to escalate cases for a Community Trigger, and it provided details on how to find out further information for this.
18. In September 2021, the landlord reminded residents at the block about how to report ASB, and also explained that CCTV was to be installed that month, which would assist if there were ASB incidents in communal areas.
19. On 15 October 2021, the landlord wrote to the resident about some further reports it had received in September 2021. It noted he had given his own account of the reports but advised that, having investigated the reports it had received, it believed he was in breach of his tenancy agreement and stated that the behaviour was impacting its housing management function. It detailed the terms it believed he had breached, and advised that it would submit an application to court for a civil injunction, to prevent him from causing harassment, alarm and distress to others. It advised that he should seek legal advice and refrain from any further ASB.
20. Following this, the resident raised concern that the landlord was putting him at risk and condoning violence against him. The landlord acknowledged his account of matters and noted that it was continuing to review evidence and feedback, but said it still intended to seek an injunction. It acknowledged the distress he may be caused by its action, but it noted that it had received further reports about him after he had been served with an acceptable behaviour contract and an unacceptable behaviour notice. It noted that it had contacted safeguarding professionals about him and urged him to seek further assistance if he needed it.
21. In November 2021, the information provided shows that:
    1. the landlord met with multiple agencies to discuss the case.
    2. the landlord’s staff undertook autism awareness training.
    3. the landlord provided further information about its tenancy support service to the resident’s advocate so that they could discuss what he felt he might need support with.
    4. the landlord asked the resident if he wanted to escalate his complaint. His response to this was unclear and the landlord contacted him again to query if he wanted to escalate the complaint.
22. In December 2021, the resident raised concerns about the pursuit of an injunction against him and the handling of matters by the landlord, the police, the local authority and mental health services. In response, the landlord explained that it still intended to pursue an injunction due to evidence it had received.
23. On 16 December 2021, this Service contacted the landlord following contact from the resident, after which the landlord wrote to the resident on 22 December 2021. It noted that it had tried to contact him by phone and email and it explained the complaint had now been escalated and referred to specific staff. It enclosed the previous response to the complaint and its complaint policy, for his information.
24. On 27 December 2021, the resident made reports about behaviour by another resident’s visitors, which was also reported to the police. The landlord subsequently reviewed CCTV footage and informed the resident and his advocate of the outcome, which included warning the neighbour about their visitors’ behaviour.
25. On 29 December 2021, the landlord issued its final response to the complaint.
    1. It noted that it had spoken to the resident, and that he was concerned his autism had not been considered, and concerned ASB reports against him had not been investigated fully. It noted that it had reviewed the previous response and spoken to staff involved.
    2. It said that it was satisfied it had taken his autism into consideration as much as possible. This included a multiple agency approach, regular email communication, and meetings with different agencies whose advice it had taken, including on the best way of conveying unwelcome news.
    3. It said that there was no evidence that investigation of complaints against him were not thorough. It advised that its files were detailed and demonstrated that investigations involved extensive evidence gathering, liaison with the other agencies, and contact with him. It advised that it was aware there were always two sides to every story, and that it had considered evidence from all parties when reaching decisions.
    4. It concluded that it was satisfied with the conclusions in the previous response, and it apologised this was not the resident’s desired outcome.
26. The landlord subsequently held further multi-agency meetings, which involved the resident’s advocate, and then on 28 March 2022 the landlord served the resident with a notice of seeking possession. This detailed 29 incidents between January 2021 and March 2022 as the basis for the notice. The information provided shows that prior to this, the landlord discussed the notice with multiple agencies; completed an Equality Act assessment; and pre-warned the resident and his advocate that it intended to visit and deliver documents concerning its next actions for previous and continued reports of ASB about him. Following this, the resident was evicted in September 2022 after the granting of an eviction order by the county court.
27. The resident brought the complaint to this Service. He expressed dissatisfaction that the landlord had not addressed his reports that other residents were trying to kill him and that he was being physically assaulted, for which he supplies photos of injuries and advises was raised with the police. He raised dissatisfaction with the landlord’s pursuit of proceedings against him and its lack of support, despite being autistic.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

28. The Ombudsman understands the resident’s situation and recognises that the concerns he has reported have affected and caused distress to him. We also understand how distressing it must have been for him to lose his home following his eviction. In cases relating to ASB, it is not the Ombudsman’s role to determine whether ASB, assault or injury occurred or who is responsible. It is also not our role to make definitive decisions about discrimination or hate crime and say if this occurred. However, we can assess how a landlord has dealt with matters in the timeframe of a complaint, and assess whether the landlord followed proper procedure, followed good practice, and behaved reasonably, taking account of all the circumstances.
29. The Ombudsman’s remit in relation to complaints is set out by our Scheme, which advises that the Ombudsman may not investigate complaints which were not brought in a reasonable period, or investigate complaints which have not exhausted a landlord’s complaints procedure. This investigation therefore mainly focuses on the issues the landlord addressed in its complaint response, following discussion with the resident; and mainly focuses on events from October 2020, six months before the complaint was raised, to December 2021, when the complaint exhausted the landlord’s complaints procedure.

The landlord’s response to the resident about its handling of reports about antisocial behaviour (‘ASB’)

30. ASB case management is a crucial aspect of a landlord’s service delivery. Effective use of an ASB procedure enables the landlord to identify appropriate steps to resolve potential areas of conflict, improve landlord/tenant relationships and improve the experience of tenants residing in their homes. ASB cases are also often the most challenging for a landlord as, in practice, options available to a landlord or chosen by a landlord to resolve a case may not include a resident’s preferred outcome, and it can become difficult to manage expectations.
31. Following ASB reports, it is necessary for the landlord to respond in accordance with its ASB policies, such as assess risks; discuss cases with those involved; use available tools to encourage parties against ASB; discuss and monitor the situation with other agencies; consider vulnerability and carry out impact assessments; and deal with reports in a proportionate and appropriate manner, considering its obligation as landlord to treat allegations from all of its customers in a consistent and evidence-led way.
32. In this case, before and after the formal complaint, it is evident that the landlord fulfilled its obligations to consider and respond to ASB reports. It discussed issues with the resident and others; it reviewed evidence; liaised with police, the local authority, mental health services and adult services; took action where it and other agencies agreed this was appropriate; and reviewed and confirmed a position on matters at appropriate times, with accompanying explanation.
33. We understand the resident feels that the warnings and the notices from the landlord were unfair, however it is evident that the landlord sought to consider and balance a range of information when making its decisions, including information from him. While it is recognised that the resident may have his own views of other events, the evidence shows that the landlord balanced the resident’s accounts against other reports it received, and shows its actions were not without information that supported its approach, for example the notice of seeking possession detailed a number of incidents. The landlord’s warning of a neighbour after it substantiated one allegation from the resident shows that it had an impartial approach. The evidence overall shows that the landlord sought to balance the needs it recognised that the resident had, against the needs of others in the block and vicinity, and considered the evidence and available options before taking any action. This means that the landlord made decisions in ways that this Service would expect to see.
34. We understand that the resident feels that the landlord did not have enough regard to his autism, however it is evident that the landlord liaised with different agencies and his advocates, and appropriately sought to understand how the resident’s autism affected him; how to discuss his behaviour with him; and how to supply information to him. The landlord also sought to discuss the resident’s behaviour, warnings and notices in advance and with involvement of his advocates, reasonably in line with how he requested, and offered to discuss other ways he or his advocate felt his autism could be taken into account. The landlord, and agencies involved, ultimately do not seem to have involved an ‘autism specialist’ although it is evident this was considered. It could consider involving an ‘autism specialist’ in similar circumstances in future, however it is evident that there were many attempts by appropriate parties to ask the resident to modify his behaviour.
35. The landlord was requested to install CCTV at the block in 2020, and was reasonably entitled to decline this if it felt other intervention tools should be first explored. The landlord then agreed in March 2021 that CCTV should be installed, but did not seem to progress this until September 2021, six months later. This does not lead this Service to find a failing, considering all the circumstances, however a recommendation is made to the landlord to review the delay and ensure that CCTV installations are progressed as swiftly as possible in future.
36. Overall, while the Ombudsman understands how difficult events must have been for the resident, and understands how he was affected, the evidence shows that the landlord balanced his accounts against other reports it received. It took into account his circumstances and took a multi-agency approach in its handling of the case. It clearly took steps to try to work with the resident, his advocates and other appropriate agencies to help him avoid any behaviour that would lead to further reports, and only took further action when it received further reports. This means that the landlord handled matters and made decisions in ways that we would expect to see.

Determination (decision)

37. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident concerning its handling of antisocial behaviour (‘ASB’) reports.

Reasons

38. While the Ombudsman understands how difficult events must have been for the resident, and understands how he was affected, the evidence shows that the landlord balanced his accounts against other reports it received. It took into account his circumstances and took a multi-agency approach in its handling of the case. It clearly took steps to try to work with the resident, his advocates and other appropriate agencies to help him avoid any behaviour that would lead to further reports, and only took further action when it received further reports. This means that the landlord handled matters and made decisions in ways that we would expect to see.

Orders and recommendations

Recommendations

39. The landlord to consider seeking advice from autism specialists in order to inform its communication approach for autistic customers, particularly for circumstances involving ASB or legal proceedings.
40. The landlord to review the case to ensure that after it agrees to install CCTV, this is progressed in an effective and timely way.