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

The Guinness Partnership Limited (202211167)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202211167

Guinness Housing Association Limited

28 September 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 handling of the resident’s reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB).

Background

  1. The resident is a former assured tenant of the landlord. The landlord is a housing association and the tenancy started on 22 April 2002, via a mutual exchange. The property is a 3 bed end terrace house. The resident ended his tenancy on 30 October 2022.
  2. The records show that the resident made several reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB) by his neighbour, to the landlord from 2019 onwards but that the original concerns started as early as 2015.
  3. The resident reported the most recent incidents of ASB from his neighbour on 24 March 2022. He reported this incident to the police community support officer on this date and then to the landlord on 1 May 2022. He advised that his neighbour had removed the large communal bins from the communal bin store and blocked communal access. He further reported that his neighbour had also pulled the resident’s personal bin from his property and tipped it over, emptying the contents on the road.
  4. He reported further incidents of this behaviour on 9 and 17 August 2022. He also advised that his neighbour had been shouting and laughing at him. He further mentioned that the neighbour was obstructing the communal walkway with his plants and hedges.
  5. The landlord responded to the resident on 18 August 2022. It advised it had visited the neighbour, who denied the allegations. It advised it would be taking no action in respect of the plants as the neighbour had removed these. It asked the resident for specific evidence in respect of the allegations about the bins and behaviour.
  6. The resident complained to the landlord on 22 August 2022. He complained that he and other neighbours had made frequent complaints of antisocial behaviour against the neighbour over the past 10 years and nothing had changed. He also stated that a previous referral to mediation had been unsuccessful and inappropriate and that he felt the matter was not being dealt with appropriately. On 24 August 2022, the resident added to his complaint, advising that his neighbour had tried to ride his bicycle at him, and sprayed him with a pressure washer, attempting to goad him into an altercation.
  7. In its stage one complaint response the landlord advised it had no incidents of ASB reports on file between 12 February 2019 and 22 August 2022, when the most recent report was filed. It advised the resident that it had visited the neighbour, further to the latest allegations and these had been denied. It asked the resident for evidence in the form of photographs or video, as it could take no further action without the necessary evidence.
  8. The resident escalated his complaint on 1 September 2022, advising that nothing had changed since his various reports of ASB. He also asked the landlord to provide the date that it visited the neighbour.
  9. In its Stage 2 response, the landlord reiterated its response that it had no record of ASB reports from the resident since a previous case was closed in 2019 and that there had been no other ASB reports made by the resident until 22 August 2022. It advised that any other reports in the meantime had been dealt with by customer liaison officers, in line with the landlord’s ASB policy. It said it had visited the neighbour, who denied the allegations and was satisfied that it had investigated fully and completed appropriate actions. It further reiterated that it needed consistent evidence against the neighbour, in order to build a case.
  10. The resident complained to this Service in September 2022 as he was not satisfied with the landlord’s response. As an outcome to his complaint, the resident would like the landlord to be held accountable for any service failings in respect of its handling of its antisocial behaviour policy.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. In his complaint to this Service, the resident mentioned previous incidents with his neighbour, dating back approximately 10 years. Whilst this Service understands the resident’s distress, Paragraph 42(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme states that this Service may not investigate complaints that were not brought to the attention of the landlord as a formal complaint within a reasonable period, which would normally be within 6 months of the matters arising. In line with this, this investigation focuses on matters relating to the resident’s most recent report of ASB from 24 March 2022 onwards.
  2. In cases relating to ASB, it is not this Service’s role to determine whether ASB occurred or who is responsible. However, the Ombudsman can assess how a landlord has dealt with reports it has received in the timeframe of a complaint, and assess whether the landlord has followed proper procedure, good practice, and behaved reasonably, taking account of all the circumstances of the case.

Policies and procedures

  1. The Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 outlines that when responding to reports of anti-social behaviour, agencies must consider the effect that such behaviour has on victims and witnesses. It also states that agencies should recognise and consider the debilitating impact on that persistent or repeated anti-social behaviour can have on victims, more so over a period of time.
  2. The landlord’s antisocial behaviour, hate crime and hate incidents policy defines ASB as: conduct that has caused, or is likely to cause:
    1. harassment, alarm, or distress to any person
    2. conduct capable of causing nuisance or annoyance to a person in relation to that person’s occupation of residential premises, or
    3.  conduct capable of causing housing-related nuisance or annoyance to any person.
  3. The landlord’s policy states that it takes a victim centred approach and that it will communicate clearly with customers to explain antisocial behaviour and its approach. The policy advises that the landlord encourages customers to resolve their own matters with their neighbours where it is safe and appropriate to do so, whilst being clear about the circumstances in which it may take action and how it will proceed if that is the case.
  4. The landlord states it takes a harm based approach to reports of ASB and works with partner agencies when appropriate to do so.
  5. It advises that it acknowledge all new reports of ASB within a maximum of 2 working days.
  6. The policy goes on to state that where people cannot solve their problems themselves, the landlord may take action. It advises that it will work both with the complainant and the alleged perpetrator wherever possible to agree a plan to tackle the ASB and this may involve mediation where appropriate. Where mediation and reasonable requests to stop the ASB fail, the landlord may decide to take additional action to resolve the behaviour.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB)

  1. The records show that when the resident reported his neighbour pulling out bins and tipping them over to the police community support officer on 24 March 2022, the community support officer contacted the landlord to advise it of such. The landlord acted appropriately, by writing to the neighbour on 4 April 2022 to advise him of his breach of tenancy. This was a reasonable and proportionate action for the landlord to take, in line with its policy. However, the landlord did not update the resident on the action it took, as per its policy. It would have been appropriate to do so as the resident was left frustrated and distressed with what he perceived to be the landlord’s inaction. Due to the lack of communication by the landlord, the resident was not aware that any action had been taken and this caused him frustration and a loss of confidence in the landlord.
  2. Due to the long history of allegations and counter allegations between the resident and his neighbour, the landlord took action and did not expect the resident and his neighbour to resolve the dispute amongst themselves, which was appropriate. However, although joint party working mediation had not been successful in the past, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to also offer some advice to the resident to revisit the offer of mediation services or, explore options such as single party mediation. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to discuss this way forward with the resident, as well as any other alternative dispute resolution options. As the landlord did not do this, it failed to manage the resident’s expectations as to what action the landlord was able to reasonably take to manage the issues. This may have allowed the resident to learn coping strategies to manage the conflict and live with his neighbour in a more effective way.
  3. Furthermore, when the resident contacted the landlord on 1 May 2022 to advise that the neighbour had tipped the bins over again, and then on 9 August 2022, to inform of the same and that the neighbour had been shouting at him, there is no evidence that the landlord contacted the resident to discuss his concerns as per its policy. This was a failing on the part of the landlord and caused the resident additional distress and loss of confidence in the landlord’s processes.
  4. The landlord’s policy states that once a resident reports ASB, it will carry out a risk assessment to assess the impact the ASB is having on the individual and whether they are vulnerable and have any identified support needs. There is no evidence that the landlord carried out any risk assessment, nor did it acknowledge the resident’s report of ASB. This is a failing on the part of the landlord. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to contact the resident to discuss the allegations and advise of any actions going forward, including any potential advice to provide evidence to the landlord.
  5. The records show that the landlord did not respond to the resident’s concerns until his further report of 17 August 2022. On this date the resident reported that his neighbour had entered the bin store and opened the bins and deliberately left the door open, causing a smell. He also reported that his neighbour had extra plant posts and hedges on his drive, causing an obstruction to the walkway.
  6.  On this occasion, the landlord responded to the resident within one working day, which was appropriate. It appropriately advised the resident that it had visited the neighbour, who had denied allegations regarding the bins and the shouting. It was reasonable that the landlord asked the resident for specific evidence, to support any further actions or interventions. It also appropriately advised the resident that it would be taking no further action regarding the plant pots and hedges as these had been moved and were not causing an obstruction.
  7. When the resident made his complaint on 22 August 2022 and added to this on 24 August 2022, stating that his neighbour had tried to ride his bicycle into him and that he had sprayed him with a pressure washer, the records show that the landlord tried to contact the resident 3 times by telephone between 23 and 30 August. This was appropriate as per the landlord’s policy. However, despite the resident’s reports of an escalation in the neighbour’s antisocial behaviour, there is no record of the landlord following this up with the resident in writing or carrying out a risk assessment or offering any advice, as per its policy. Whilst it was positive that the landlord attempted to call the resident 3 times, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have considered alternative means of contacting him, to ensure that the resident felt heard and so the landlord could agree any appropriate follow on actions.
  8. Furthermore, in its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord informed the resident that it had no records of him making a report of ASB between 12 February 2019, for a previous closed incident, until the Stage 1 complaint of 22 August 2022. This was not appropriate and shows a failing on the part of the landlord as the records show that the resident reported ASB on 24 March 2022, 1 May, 9 August, and 17 August 2022. The landlord had sent the neighbour a tenancy breach warning letter, further to the resident’s reports of 24 March 2022. As the landlord’s policy states it will record all reports of ASB, it is unclear why the landlord did not treat these as reports or ASB or relay this to the resident. This is not appropriate and there appears to indicate poor record keeping, case management and logging ASB reports on the part of the landlord. As the landlord had made the decision not to manage earlier reports from the resident through its ASB policy, this should have been made clear to the resident at the time and effectively communicated. No evidence has been provided to suggest the landlord reverted to a tenancy or neighbourhood management policy. This suggests poor record keeping within its case management practices. This lack of effective communication would have caused additional frustration and inconvenience to the resident.
  9. In its stage 2 response to the resident, the landlord advised that more recent allegations of ASB, had been dealt with by customer liaison officers, who managed each report in line with the landlord’s ASB policy. It also stated that it needed consistent evidence of nuisance to take action against the resident’s neighbour so asked the resident to provide evidence so it could build a case.
  10. Although it is appropriate that the landlord advised the resident that it needed consistent evidence to build a case, the records show that the landlord did not acknowledge or respond to the resident’s reports of ASB on the dates of 1 May and 9 August 2022. This is contrary to its policy and caused the resident additional distress and frustration and time and trouble in seeking to understand the actions the landlord was taking to seek a resolution.
  11. Due to the landlord’s failure to log some of the resident’s concerns as reports of ASB, to provide any support and assistance and due to the fact that the landlord did not respond to 2 of the resident’s reports of ASB, a finding of service failure is made, along with orders for redress.

Determination

  1. In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of antisocial (ASB).

Orders

  1. Within four weeks of this report the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Apologise to the resident for the failings identified in this report.
    2. Review the antisocial behaviour handling failures in this case, to determine what action has been or will be taken to prevent a recurrence of these.
    3. Pay the resident £100 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by its failings in its management of reports of ASB.
  2. The landlord should provide this Service with evidence of compliance with the above orders.

 Recommendations

  1. The landlord should ensure that its frontline colleagues are fully trained in its ASB policy and procedures.
  2. The landlord to provide some clarity on how it manages neighbour disputes when it does not classify resident reports of incidents as ASB, ensuring that its ASB and neighbourhood management policies are aligned.
  3. If it has not already done so, to review this Service’s Knowledge and Information Management (KIM) Spotlight report and self assess against the recommendations in the report.