London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) (202327882)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202327882

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

29 July 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
1. the resident’s reports of noise and noise transference.
2. the associated complaints.

Background

The resident is a leaseholder who has occupied the property since March 2021. The property is a ground floor 2-bedroom flat.
The resident reported that she was being disturbed by noise from the flat above in November 2022. The resident said this was due to her neighbour replacing the carpet with wooden flooring in October 2022. The landlord issued the resident with the Noise App so that she could make a recording of any incidents which disturbed her. The resident made a total of 64 recordings of noise between 10 November 2022 and 25 February 2023.
The resident contacted the landlord on 12 December 2022 and 12 January 2023 and said that she had not received any contact about her anti-social behaviour case (ASB).
On 9 February 2023 the resident made a formal complaint to the landlord. She said she was unhappy because:
1. no one had contacted her about the noise from the flat above
2. the noise app recordings she had submitted had not been listened to
3. the flat above had replaced carpet with laminate flooring which had increased the level of noise, and referred to hearing her neighbours walking around, switching lights on and talking to each other
4. she had contacted the landlord on 6 December 2022 and 12 January 2023 and had not received a response
The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 20 February 2023. The landlord said:
1. the officer who had initially dealt with the resident’s ASB report had left the organisation
2. it had attempted to call the resident on 13 December 2022
3. it had logged the report and backdated it to 6 December 2022
4. the new officer would contact the resident within 5 days to discuss the case
5. it would agree an action plan with the resident as part of the case management process
6. it would close the complaint as the ASB case remained open and under review
The resident escalated her complaint on 22 February 2023. She said:
1. she had spoken to the new officer in December 2022 who had told her that the landlord would make some enquiries and update her
2. she had not heard back from the officer
3. the noise was ongoing
4. the landlord had not contacted her to complete an action plan
5. the landlord had not listened to the noise app recordings
On 31 March 2023 the landlord issued its stage 2 response. It said:
1. it had spoken to the resident on 10 March 2023 and explained what it considered as excessive noise and what was everyday noise
2. it had explained the noise the resident had reported was everyday noise
3. in such circumstances the landlord would speak to the household concerned and ask them to be more considerate towards their neighbours
4. it agreed that properties above ground level should not have wooden/laminate flooring as it created noise transference between properties
5. it could not locate any recordings submitted by the resident on the noise app
6. it would normally only give the noise app in instances of loud music as opposed to everyday living noise. It apologised if it had previously indicated otherwise
7. it would visit the neighbour to clarify circumstances in their home and if, upon inspection, the landlord found that the floor coverings were not suitable, it would instruct the neighbour to change this
8. it would update the resident after this visit
9. it accepted it had not contacted the resident within 5 days as promised in its stage 1 response
The landlord accepted there had been poor communication with the resident since she raised the issues. It offered £60 in compensation for the resident’s time and the landlord’s failure to respond in a timely manner. The resident’s complaint had been about ASB as well as communal repairs and cleaning. The compensation offered was for the time taken to respond to all three issues.
On 7 March 2024, the resident informed this service that she remained dissatisfied because:
1. the noise was ongoing and it was affecting her ability to work from home
2. the noise was affecting her mental health
3. she had not received the compensation which the landlord had offered at stage 2

Assessment and findings

The Ombudsman acknowledges that the resident said the incidents she reported have affected her mental health and prevented her from working from home. However, it is important to note it is not the Ombudsman’s role to determine whether ASB or noise nuisance has occurred or, if it did, who was responsible. What the Ombudsman can assess is how a landlord has dealt with the reports it has received and whether it followed proper procedure and followed good practice, taking account of the circumstances of the case.

Record keeping

It is important to first comment here on the landlord’s record keeping. The Ombudsman expects landlords to keep a robust record of contacts with residents. This is because clear, accurate, and easily accessible records provide an audit trail and enhance landlords’ ability to identify and respond to problems when they arise.
It is the Ombudsman’s opinion that the landlord has failed to maintain adequate records. The landlord’s record-keeping has impacted this service’s ability to carry out a thorough investigation, as highlighted at various points throughout this report. This was a failure by the landlord and contributed to the other failures identified in this report.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s report of noise and noise transference

The landlord’s ASB policy says it will assign a priority for the case based on the type of ASB reported and assess reports using the evidence available.
The landlord does not have a separate policy to deal with noise. The Ombudsman understands that the landlord deals with reports of noise via its ASB policy which states:
1. it will consider noise as ASB where it is persistent, deliberate or targeted
2. it will not normally consider noise caused by people going about their daily lives as ASB
3. non ASB will be logged and recorded and no further action taken
4. the landlord will inform the reporting party why it will not investigate further
5. potential solutions may still be offered where appropriate
6. where issues are not ASB or housing management-related, it may refer residents to other agencies who could offer them support where required
7. it will encourage and advise residents to resolve minor issues themselves
As part of its case management, the policy states the landlord will:
1. keep in regular contact with the reporting party or as agreed
2. agree an action plan with the reporting party
The resident contacted the landlord on 4 November 2022 to request an update on her case and referred to discussing the issues with the landlord in a previous telephone call. The resident requested an update in relation to what had happened at a visit to her neighbour.
There is no evidence that there was an existing ASB case or that the landlord had logged and recorded the resident’s reports at this time. There is no evidence that the landlord agreed an action plan with the resident or that it kept her updated with the actions it had taken. This was not appropriate as it was not consistent with the landlord’s ASB policy and procedure.
The resident next contacted the landlord on 12 December 2023 via her online account in which:
1. she said the noise was ongoing from the neighbour’s property
2. she confirmed that she had previously spoken to the landlord about the issues, and she had been asked to use the noise app to record the noise
3. she said she had made over 50 recordings which had not been listened to
4. she had written her neighbours a letter to make them aware of the noise and how it was affecting her, but this had not made any difference
5. she had emailed the landlord’s complaint email address on 5 December 2022 and had not received a response
6. she said the noise was affecting her quality of life and she would like the landlord to take the matter seriously
The landlord attempted to call the resident on 13 December 2022. The officer left a voicemail message explaining that she had taken over from the previous officer. The file note indicates that the officer asked to review the resident’s audio recordings so that the landlord could gain a better understanding of what was happening. This was appropriate and in line with the landlord’s policy.
On 12 January 2023 the resident contacted the landlord and said the noise from the flat above was unbearable and she asked what the landlord was doing to resolve it.
The landlord responded to the resident on 25 January 2023. It apologised for the delay in responding to her, which it said was due to unusually high demand. The landlord said it would ask its officer to contact the resident to discuss the noise.
In the absence of a response, the resident raised her complaint on 9 February 2023. As part of its stage 1 response the landlord said it had logged the resident’s noise report and backdated it. The landlord noted that it had not agreed an action plan with the resident, and this would form part of the landlord’s case management actions. It said that its officer would contact the resident within 5 days to discuss her concerns.
On 22 February 2023 the landlord telephoned the resident but there was no answer. The landlord noted that it would attempt a welfare check the following day when in the area. It was reasonable that the landlord attempted to speak to the resident whilst it was in the area, however there is no evidence to show whether this visit was successful or not. This is a record keeping failure by the landlord.
On 22 February 2023 the resident escalated her complaint. She again referred to the recordings she had made on the noise app which had still not been listened to.
The resident contacted the landlord on 2 March 2023 to report that the landlord’s officer had not contacted her, as it had promised in the stage 1 response. As stated at paragraph 24, this service has seen evidence that the landlord attempted to speak to the resident on 22 February 2023. This was appropriate as it was within the 5 days set out in the complaint response.
On 10 March 2023 the landlord emailed the resident. The landlord referred to a telephone call with the resident in which the landlord confirmed it would have a further discussion with the neighbour regarding the floor coverings. It is not clear from the records when this telephone call took place or what actions the landlord discussed with the resident. This is a record keeping failure by the landlord. The landlord also referred to enclosed information in relation to what the landlord considered noise nuisance. The landlord has not provided a copy of the attachment to this service. We are therefore unable to establish what information the landlord gave to the resident on this date. This is a further failure by the landlord.
The landlord raised several tasks on its ASB file on 16 March 2023 which included agreeing an action plan with the resident and reviewing reported incidents. The landlord marked these actions complete on 5 April 2023. There is no evidence to show that the landlord agreed an action plan with the resident or reviewed the incidents. This was not appropriate as it was not consistent with the landlord’s ASB policy.
On 29 March 2023 the landlord emailed the resident to confirm it had spoken to the neighbour who had confirmed they had installed underlay under the wooden flooring. The landlord also confirmed that there were rugs and runners in the flat, which the landlord had seen. It was appropriate that the landlord spoke to the neighbour about the issues raised and provided feedback to the resident.
The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 31 March 2023, in which it said it had been unable to locate the resident’s noise app recordings.
On 5 April 2023, the landlord telephoned the resident who confirmed that nothing had changed. The landlord agreed to speak to the neighbour again about the noise. Although it was reasonable of the landlord to speak to the neighbour, there is no evidence that it did so. The landlord closed the ASB case on 30 May 2023.
In its case closure letter, the landlord explained that it would not consider everyday living noise as ASB and in order for the noise to be considered as breach of tenancy it must be deemed as statutory nuisance. The letter confirmed that agreed actions had been set out in the action plan. It confirmed the following:
1. it had interviewed the other party to discuss the reports
2. measures had been put in place to mitigate the ASB
3. the neighbour had installed underlay under the wooden floor
4. the neighbour had put down rugs and runners to minimise the noise
5. it had written to the neighbour reaffirming terms and conditions of the tenancy agreement
The resident made a total of 64 recordings on the noise app between 10 November 2022 and 25 February 2023. The evidence indicates that the landlord did not review these recordings before making the decision to close the case.
As recommended in the Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Noise Complaints, noise recordings submitted by residents should always be listened to by the case handler to ensure robust investigations that are informed by a true understanding of the noise being reported. The recordings would give insight into the level of noise emanating into the resident’s home. Without listening to the recordings, the landlord has not fully investigated the resident’s report, this was a failure by the landlord.
The Ombudsman expects landlords to keep in regular communication with residents whilst dealing with reports of ASB and noise. The landlords policy states that it will keep in regular contact with the reporting party. The evidence shows that the resident had to chase the landlord for updates on several occasions. This was not appropriate as it was not consistent with good practice and its own policy and procedure.
Considering all the circumstances there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the ASB case in that it failed:
1. to maintain adequate records
2. to agree an action plan with the resident
3. to keep in regular contact with the resident
4. to listen to the Noise App recordings submitted by the resident before closing the file

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaints

The landlord has a 2-stage complaint procedure. The landlord’s complaints policy states it will respond at stage 1 within 10 working days and 20 working days at stage 2.
The resident made the initial complaint on 9 February 2023. The landlord provided its stage 1 response on 20 February 2023 which was 8 working days later. This was appropriate as it was consistent with its policy.
The resident escalated her complaint on 22 February 2023. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 31 March 2023, which was 28 working days later. This was not appropriate as it was in excess of the landlord’s policy.
The landlord did not provide the resident with an explanation that it would extend the stage 2 or an apology for the delay. This is not consistent with the Complaint Handling Code.
The landlord offered compensation of £60 for the resident’s time and the landlord’s failure to respond in a timely manner. In addition to the ASB, the compensation related to failures for matters which are not subject to this investigation. We are unable to determine how the landlord distributed this compensation and are therefore unable to reach a conclusion as to whether this was reasonable or not.
The resident informed this service on 7 March 2024 that she had not received the £60 compensation from the landlord. Compensation is a means of offering redress to recognise and acknowledge the impact on someone for something which has gone wrong. Therefore, it is important that the landlord ensures that the process of providing compensation does not give cause for further complaint.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of noise and noise transference.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlords handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

The landlord must, within 28 days of the date of this determination:
1. pay the resident £320 compensation (an additional £260 to that awarded during the complaint procedure). The additional compensation is broken down as follows:
  1. £200 for the distress and inconvenience caused by failing to fully investigate the noise and noise transference
  2. £60 for the failures identified in the complaint handling

The landlord must pay the compensation directly to the resident. The total compensation (£320) may be reduced by £60 if that has already been paid to the resident.

listen to the resident’s noise app recordings
reconsider its ASB response and case closure once those recordings have been reviewed
explain to the resident what action it intends to take, if any at all

Recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the landlord:
1. consider mediation in this case to prevent escalation of the issues
2. review the recommendations set out in the Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Noise Nuisance, available on the Ombudsman’s website. The report highlights that it is not always appropriate to investigate noise complaints through a landlord’s antisocial behaviour (ASB) policy. Noise complaints often require a tailored approach that is appropriate to the circumstances of each complaint. The landlord should consider this and take the recommendations made in the report on board to improve its service