The new improved webform is online now! Residents and representatives can access the form online today.

London Borough of Hounslow (202215296)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202215296

London Borough of Hounslow

12 March 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 the resident’s reports of anti-social behaviour.
  2. The Ombudsman will also investigate the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Background

  1. The resident lives in the property, owned by the landlord, under a secure tenancy. She lives there with her mother and brother.
  2. The resident first contacted the landlord to make a noise pollution enquiry on 26 April 2022. The next day, the landlord sent out log sheets for the resident to complete and return. The resident returned these to the landlord in June 2022.
  3. On 25 July 2022 the resident raised a complaint to the landlord as she was unhappy with the progression of the anti-social behaviour (ASB) case. The resident continued to report incidents of ASB and her local MP and a local charity also contacted the landlord on her behalf.
  4. The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 4 November 2022, in which it said it would be contacting the alleged perpetrators’ landlord about the allegations. It said a visit had been carried out, which found that a buzzing noise she had reported was coming from an electric fan, and was not classed as a statutory nuisance.
  5. The resident responded on 7 November 2022, saying the landlord’s response did not address all her issues, and that the measures it was now putting in place should have been done in June 2022 when the ASB case was set up. She asked for the complaint to be escalated to stage 2 on 11 November 2022, and the landlord acknowledged this request on 23 November 2022.
  6. The landlord sent its stage 2 response on 22 December 2022. It confirmed that the alleged perpetrator had now moved out of the neighbouring property and so there was no longer a safeguarding risk. It accepted the issue could have been dealt with more quickly and offered the resident compensation of £250.
  7. The resident was not happy with this level of compensation and said she still felt unsafe. She asked this Service to look into the complaint.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of anti-social behaviour

  1. The resident first reported possible noise nuisance on 26 April 2022. The notes from this contact do not indicate that it was being reported as ASB at this time. The following day the landlord sent a letter to her including log sheets, which it asked her to complete and return. As this was the first report of a possible noise problem, this was a reasonable step for the landlord to take at this time.
  2. The resident contacted the landlord again on 28 April 2022 to report further instances of noise problems. No action was taken by the landlord due to it having sent out the log sheets the day before. The log sheet the resident later returned showed incidents earlier prior to 26 April 2022, when she first contacted the landlord, as well as further incidents in May 2022. She contacted the landlord again on 16 May 2022 by a voicemail and online, and reported noise nuisance. The landlord did not take any action, but has now acknowledged that it should have contacted her and potentially arranged a visit, as set out in its policy.
  3. The resident returned the completed log sheet to the landlord around 6 June 2022 and the landlord has acknowledged that it received the sheet at this time. However, due to an administration error, the form was attached to the wrong case and the case handler was not made aware of it until September 2022, so no action was taken at that time.
  4. The landlord did open an ASB case on 20 June 2022 and a referral was made to its ASB team, however the landlord’s records show that the team took no action.
  5. The neighbouring property is owned by a private landlord. The landlord’s ASB policy explains that it has limited powers where the actions are carried out by a neighbour who is a freeholder (or their tenant). However, it says it may contact the other landlord as they may be able to take action under their own tenancy agreement. It also says that if necessary, it can obtain an injunction.
  6. The resident continued to report problems, and sent ring doorbell footage to the landlord via email, throughout August 2022, however there is no evidence the landlord attempted to make contact with the neighbouring landlord at this time. The landlord’s internal records show that it was unsure what team should be dealing with the case, due to the neighbour not being a council tenant. This meant that no one took ownership of the case and no meaningful actions were taken before the log sheet was found on 15 September 2022.
  7. After it had acknowledged the log sheets, the landlord sent a letter to the neighbours on 22 September 2022. According to its policy, this is a step it should take once it has interviewed the person reporting the ASB. As this step was missed in May 2022, as noted by the landlord, this meant that there was a significant delay in contact being made with the neighbour.
  8. On 4 October 2022 the landlord told the resident that her concerns had been referred to the community risk panel and a meeting would be taking place. The resident tried to find out more about this meeting however it was not clear who her point of contact should be. One member of staff responded to let her know that the ASB team were dealing with it. Another then copied her in on an email which said “this case does not sit with me, is not on my case management list”. It appears this was intended to be an internal email and it was not appropriate that this was also sent to the resident.
  9. A meeting took place on 19 October 2022 with multiple stakeholders, including from the landlord and the police, as part of the Community Trigger process. It was agreed that the landlord would contact the landlord of the neighbouring property, the police would provide the landlord with its reports and the landlord would seek legal advice. The landlord’s teams would also meet urgently to discuss a plan of action. There was a delay in getting to this point, as the resident had first raised concerns 6 months earlier. However, these proposed actions were an appropriate way to move forward, in line with the landlord’s ASB policy.
  10. The landlord visited the resident and the neighbour on 20 October 2022. It said there was no nuisance witnessed at this time and it found that a buzzing noise the resident had reported was caused by a desk fan, which it said was not a statutory nuisance. It explained this to the resident during the visit.
  11. In its stage 1 response, the landlord said the case was now being managed by its specialist ASB team. It said that contact had been made with the neighbouring landlord and it was allowing time for a response. The resident responded to say she was not happy with this, as the measures it was now taking should have been taken in June 2022.
  12. A further meeting took place on 25 November 2022, where actions were agreed, including arranging an interview with the neighbours and discussing with their landlord about ending their tenancy. However, it was confirmed on 5 December 2022 that the neighbours had moved out so the actions agreed at this meeting were no longer needed. The landlord reiterated this in its stage 2 response of 22 December 2022 and offered her £250 compensation to recognise its failures in its handling of the ASB case.
  13. The resident said that she still felt unsafe, as she knew the neighbours had not moved away from the local area. While this Service appreciates that she feels the threat has not completely gone away, it is not within the landlord’s power to decide where the neighbours should live. As they were not a tenant of the landlord, it had no say in where they were moved to. The resident would need to contact the police if there are any future incidents, as indicated by the landlord in its stage 2 response.
  14. Where there are failings by a landlord, as is the case here, the Ombudsman will consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the issue satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this the Ombudsman takes into account whether the landlord’s offer of redress, which included an apology and an offer of compensation, was in line with the Ombudsman’s dispute resolution principles.
  15. Whilst the landlord could have done more to assist the resident at an earlier stage, it has accepted and acknowledged this during its internal complaints process. The landlord was not the landlord of the alleged perpetrator, which limited the actions available to it. The landlord could have acted more swiftly, however the situation was ultimately resolved when the neighbours moved out.
  16. The Ombudsman is of the view that the compensation offered by the landlord for failures in its handling of the resident’s reports of ASB was proportionate to the distress and inconvenience caused, and in line with this Service’s remedies guidance, and was therefore reasonable. As such, the Ombudsmanconsiders there was reasonable redress offered by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of ASB.
  17. An recommendation has been made for the landlord to review its ASB processes to ensure its staff know which team should deal with cases involving private landlord tenants.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint

  1. Landlords must have an effective complaint process to provide a good service to their residents. An effective complaints process means landlords can fix problems quickly, learn from their mistakes and build good relationships with residents. In this case the landlord’s complaints process lacked customer focus and it took too long to respond at both stages, delaying the final outcome.
  2. The landlord’s complaints policy says that it will respond to a complaint within 15 working days at stage 1 and within 20 working days at stage 2.
  3. The resident raised a complaint via email on 25 July 2022. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 27 July 2022 and provided the resident with a reference number. On 21 September 2022, after the resident had not had any response, her MP emailed the landlord asking for it to investigate. The MP chased this up on 3 October 2022.
  4. The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 4 November 2022, 73 working days after the resident raised the complaint, which was an unreasonable delay. There is no evidence it sent the resident any updates about the complaint or explained the delay, which its complaints policy sets out that it will do. While the landlord did apologise for the delay within its response, it provided no explanation for why it had taken more than 3 months to respond.
  5. The resident made it clear she was not happy with the response on 7 November 2022, and said there were errors in its response that she wanted correcting so she could prepare her request for escalation. She requested the escalation on 11 November 2022, which the landlord did not acknowledge until 23 November 2022. However, it did set a deadline for its response of 9 December 2022, which was 20 working days from the escalation request, in line with its policy.
  6. After no stage 2 response was sent, a local charity that was supporting the resident emailed the landlord on 16 December 2022 to ask it to send its response urgently. The landlord sent its stage 2 response on 22 December 2022, 29 working days after the resident requested the escalation. The landlord acknowledged that both the ASB case and the complaint could have been handled in a more timely manner, however it did not demonstrate that it had learnt from the mistakes that led to delays at stage 1.
  7. The landlord’s chief executive office sent a further response to the resident on 13 January 2022, after the conclusion of its internal complaints process. This said that it had taken her concerns seriously and had recognised failings that it was now taking steps to address. It apologised for the way it handled the case and any distress this caused. This Service recognises that the landlord has provided a written apology, albeit after its internal complaints process had been completed.
  8. The Ombudsman considers there to have been maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint. It took almost 5 months for it to complete its internal complaint process, which is not a reasonable timescale. This delay allowed time for the ASB issues to escalate and become more serious in nature.
  9. An order has been made for the landlord to pay the resident compensation of £200 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s delays in responding to the complaint at both stages. An order has also been made for the landlord to self-assess against the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Scheme, there was reasonable redress by the landlord in relation to its handling of the resident’s reports of anti-social behaviour.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in relation to its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders

  1. The landlord to pay the resident £450 compensation, less any amount already paid during its internal complaints process, broken down as follows:
    1. £250 for the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of ASB, as offered during the landlord’s complaints process.
    2. £200 for the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.
  2. The landlord to provide evidence of compliance with the above order to this service within 28 days of this report.
  3. The landlord to self-assess against the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code and provide evidence of this within 8 weeks of this report.

Recommendation

  1. The landlord to review its ASB processes to ensure its staff know which team should deal with cases involving private landlord tenants.