Tuntum Housing Association Limited (202005850)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202005850

Tuntum Housing Assioation Limited

19 November 2021

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 response to the residents reports of:
1. Anti-social behaviour (ASB) including noise and nuisance and harassment.
2. The landlord’s complaint handling.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident is an assured shorthold tenant of the landlord at the property, a one-bedroom flat. The resident is subject to the terms and conditions contained in the tenancy agreement. The landlord is a housing association and the resident is high priority status on the landlord’s transfer list.
The landlord operates a two-stage complaints policy. The policy requires that the complainant is kept updated throughout the complaints process. If the resident makes a complaint at the first stage, the landlord should respond within 10 working days. If the resident is dissatisfied with the response, the resident can request an independent internal review of the decision and it aims to provide a response within 20 working days.
The landlord operates an ASB policy. The policy notes that ASB is any conduct that is capable of causing nuisance or annoyance to any persons including using accommodation for an unlawful purpose. Its website notes that noise from walking around your own home and listening to music during reasonable hours is not considered ASB. The policy highlights that possible remedies for ASB include warnings, acceptable behaviour contracts and working with other agencies such as the police.
The landlord has provided this Service with evidence related to neighbours of the resident – this contains information that is personal to the neighbours so cannot be shared within this report but it has been used to provide context.

Summary of events

It is acknowledged that there have been historical issues of ASB and noise and nuisance at the resident’s property. The resident reported issues in relation to the revving of motorbike engines, loud noises and slamming doors from her neighbour going back to May 2017. Evidence provided by both parties demonstrates that the landlord had opened ASB case files in relation to the issues raised in 2017, 2018 and 2019. Due to the historic nature of these complaints this case will focus on the more recent ASB complaints by the resident, however past complaints, internal records and notes have been used to provide context.
On 6 June 2019, the resident informed the landlord about visitors at the neighbour’s house crossing her driveway and approaching her door. The resident advised that she had a security camera in place that made them leave, however she felt intimidated and notified the police of the incident. The resident also advised that there had been continued revving of the motorbike engines in the area and banging and slamming doors coming from her neighbour.
In June 2019, the landlord opened a new ASB case file and completed a risk assessment matrix to determine the severity of the ASB issues and determine what support it could provide to the resident. There is evidence that the landlord took the following actions based on its internal records and notes:
1. It performed a home visit with the resident on 13 June 2019 to discuss her ASB issue.
2. On 14 June 2019, it issued the alleged perpetrator with a warning letter for noise and nuisance particularly in relation to slamming doors and the revving of a motorbike.
3. In July 2019, it issued the alleged perpetrator with a written warning about ongoing ASB issues at the property.
4. In August 2019, it met with the alleged perpetrator about the noise and nuisance at the property which was denied.
5. It communicated with police and the neighbourhood care team about reports of ASB.
6. Provided the resident with diary sheets to record any incidents of ASB and noise nuisance.
On 15 November 2019, the resident made a formal complaint to the landlord in relation to the ongoing ASB at the property. She stated that her case had not been taken seriously by the landlord and that its inaction had allowed the issues to continue. She advised that the lack of communication from the landlord had led to the case being drawn out. The resident advised the landlord of a historical incident where she was racially abused and said the landlord had failed to take action.
On 19 November 2019, the landlord issued the resident’s neighbour with a written tenancy caution in relation to noise and nuisance and it asked that the behaviour cease immediately
On 25 November 2019, the landlord acknowledged the resident’s stage one complaint and advised that it would provide a response within 10 working days.
On 4 December 2019, the landlord attended the resident’s neighbour’s property to discuss ongoing ASB issues and put in place a number of caution conditions.
On 20 December 2019, the landlord attended the resident’s property to discuss her stage one complaint in order to get a full understanding of the issues raised.
The resident made a number of reports in relation to ongoing ASB at the property from June to December 2019 in relation to the noise issues experienced at the property predominantly from motorbikes. In January 2020, the resident submitted diary sheets from the period that depicted 14 individual instances of ASB between 1 to 31 January 2020. The acts of ASB included noise from motorbikes, slamming of doors and banging noises.
On 13 January 2020, the landlord issued the resident with its stage one response and provided a summary of the resident’s concerns and addressed the following:
1. It advised that ASB cases can take time to resolve and that action can only be taken when there is sufficient evidence to support the allegations.
2. It advised that the resident was currently on the waiting list for noise monitoring equipment. It advised that once the monitoring period was over it would review the evidence collected and this would form the basis of future action.
3. It worked closely with the police and the local community protection team upon the resident’s reports of ASB. It stated that it had issued the resident’s neighbour with written warnings where there was evidence of a tenancy breach.
4. It admitted that although it had taken prompt action in working with external agencies if had failed to maintain consistent communication with the resident and provide written updates of its actions. It offered a formal apology and £25 of love to shop vouchers as a gesture of goodwill.
5. It advised the resident to report any noise and nuisance and fill out the diary sheet provided and said that it would contact the resident regularly going forward to provide updates and advise when a suitable property became available.
6. Racial abuse – it advised that it had no evidence of the resident ever reporting racial abuse. It advised that racial abuse was a criminal offence and that it would be investigated within one day if reported. It asked the resident to provide any evidence in relation to the incident and advised that if it occurred again to report it to the police or its service.
On 15 January 2020, the resident asked for a review of her complaint as she felt the landlord failed to address all the issues she raised.
On 22 January 2020, the landlord visited the alleged perpetrators property to review the caution conditions put in place in December 2019.
On 7 February 2020, the landlord issued the resident with its stage two response and addressed the following:
1. It apologised to the resident for the times that it did not live up to its service standards and said it would be training all staff in relation to a ‘lessons learnt’ monitoring process of ASB complaints.
2. It advised that there was no evidence of the resident reporting the hate crime however said that going forward all staff would be receiving training to ensure that incidences of hate crimes are identified, reported and dealt with appropriately.
On 11 February 2020, the resident contacted the landlord and advised that its stage two complaint response failed to address a number of the ASB issues and would like the complaint escalated. The landlord confirmed its receipt that day and asked the resident to complete an independent complaints panel form. A date was set for a hearing on 5 April 2020.
The landlord informed the resident that the independent complaints panel hearing was cancelled due to Covid-19, it advised the resident that she could apply straight to the Ombudsman for a review of her case.
On 2 March 2020, the landlord contacted the resident’s neighbour about ongoing ASB at the property and organised a home inspection to discuss the issue. It also asked the neighbour to remove a wind chime that had been causing noise nuisance immediately.
On 13 March 2020, noise monitoring equipment was installed at the resident’s property.
On 28 May 2020, The Environmental Health Officer who listened to the recordings advised that after one month of recording the noise monitoring device failed to establish statutory nuisance. It advised that some noise was heard on the recordings but only minimal noise was audible. It advised that the noise monitoring equipment could be installed again if the issue continued, however the resident would have to wait until the easing of Covid-19 restrictions.
On 22 June 2020, the resident claimed that although the noise monitoring was in the property for a month she claimed it wasn’t working for half the time and that the neighbours changed their behaviour due to being informed about its installation.
On 15 September 2020, a representative on behalf of the resident advised that she would like to have the noise monitoring equipment reinstalled as there was continued noise from motorbikes and banging during the night. The equipment was installed at the property for a period of three weeks from September to October 2020 and no evidence of noise nuisance was discovered.
On 17 January 2021, the resident completed and returned the independent Complaints panel form.
On 2 February 2021, the independent complaint panel provided its formal response and addressed the following:
1. It acknowledged that the landlord had fallen short of their own service standards in regard to the resident’s case. It said that the communication with her was slow and inconsistent, which meant that the resident was not kept up to date as to what was happening which caused distress and inconvenience.
2. It advised that the landlord used the case to improve its handling of ASB cases, this included the overhaul of its ASB service level standards, improved IT systems and additional training to staff.
3. It advised that the landlord had appropriately apologised, offered a £25 goodwill payment, provided support around re-housing, and put in place actions to improve how it deals with ASB. The panel felt that there was not anything more the landlord could have done to help bring a resolution to the resident’s complaint.

Assessment and findings

Anti-social behaviour (ASB) including noise and nuisance and harassment.

The Ombudsman considers complaints about how a landlord has responded to reports of a problem. The Ombudsman’s role is to decide if the landlord dealt with the resident’s reports ASB appropriately and reasonably and to determine, in this Service’s opinion, what was fair in all the circumstances of the case.
It is not disputed that the resident began to raise concerns about ASB and noise and nuisance at the property as early as 2017. The resident made her most recent series of complaints to the landlord on 6 June 2019. The landlord demonstrated that within a week it had opened an ASB case file, wrote to the alleged perpetrator and issued a number of formal warnings about the neighbour’s conduct. It met with both parties on a number of occasions and met with police and the neighbourhood care team in an attempt to resolve the ASB issues. These were all appropriate actions and in accordance with the landlord’s ASB policy.
The resident made further reports of ASB and noise and nuisance at the property on 15 November 2019. The landlord immediately undertook an investigation of the matter and attended the alleged perpetrators property to discuss the issues raised. It issued the resident’s neighbour with a tenancy caution and advised the resident that noise monitoring equipment would be installed at her property as soon as it became available. It advised the resident to continue to complete the diary sheets that it provided and it also liaised with the police and neighbourhood care team about monitoring the area for the sound of motorbikes. These were appropriate actions for the landlord to take to investigate reports of anti-social behaviour and were in line with its ASB policy.
The landlord had a number of informal actions available to it which are set out in its policies and procedures, namely warning letters, interviews with the resident and alleged perpetrator, tenancy cautions and working with other agencies. Based on evidence seen by this Service, the landlord interviewed the alleged perpetrator on several occasions and worked with external agencies including police to investigate the matter. It appropriately issued the neighbour with a number of written warnings and spoke with neighbouring properties in order to corroborate the resident’s complaint. It installed noise monitoring equipment in the property on two occasions but it was determined that the noise did not constitute statutory nuisance. The landlord issued the resident with a tenancy condition in an attempt to address the issues. The actions taken by the landlord were in line with its ASB policy.
It is evident that the ASB issues at the property caused the resident significant distress. The landlord acknowledged it had fallen short in the delivery of its service standards in regard to the resident’s case. It is evident from the information provided that the landlord failed to respond to the resident’s requests for information in a reasonable timeframe and also failed to provide regular updates on the case. This evidently caused the resident additional distress and inconvenience.
The landlord offered a £25 of love to shop vouchers as a gesture of goodwill however given the circumstances of the case this failed to adequately compensate the resident for the landlord’s acknowledged failures. The landlord did not provide a copy of its compensation policy however given the multiple occasions the landlord failed to respond within a reasonable timeframe and/or did not keep the resident informed about the case an additional amount of £150 would be reasonable to compensate the resident for the distress experienced.
In summary, the landlord’s actions in response to the resident’s allegations of ASB were appropriate however it failed to respond to the resident requests for information within a reasonable timeframe and did not provide regular updates to her. Although the landlord later accepted these failures, it did not offer the resident sufficient compensation to put them right.

The landlord’s complaint handling

There were acknowledged failures by the landlord in relation to its handling of the resident’s complaint. The resident made her stage one complaint on 15 November 2019 and the landlord provided a stage one response on 13 January 2020, this represents an inappropriate 6-week delay in the landlord providing its complaint response which was not appropriate or in line with its complaints policy.
The resident asked for a review of the decision on 15 January 2020 and the landlord progressed the complaint and provided its final stage two review on 7 February 2020 in line with its complaints policy. The resident again claimed that the landlord failed to address the issues she raised and asked that her complaint be escalated. A date was set for the independent complaints panel on 5 April 2020 however due to Covid-19 the panel hearing was cancelled and the landlord informed the resident that she could apply straight to the Ombudsman with her complaint which was reasonable given the circumstances of the case.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of:
1. Anti-social behaviour (ASB) including noise and nuisance and harassment.
2. Its complaints handling.

Reasons

The range of actions taken by the landlord in response to the resident’s ASB reports were appropriate however it failed to keep the resident informed about the actions it had taken and keep the resident up to date, this caused noted distress and inconvenience to the resident. Whilst the landlord accepted this, the £25 offered was not sufficient to compensate for the distress caused.
The complaints handling by the landlord was not in line with its complaints procedure at stage one of the complaints process. The landlord failed to offer any compensation for the distress caused to the resident.

Orders

The Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay the resident total compensation of £225 comprising:
1. £150 in respect of the distress experienced by the resident as a result of the landlord’s failure to keep the resident update in relation to her ASB incident.
2. £50 in respect of the distress experienced by the resident as a result of the landlord’s delay in providing its stage one complaint response.
3. The £25 voucher originally offered by the landlord
This compensation is to be paid within four weeks of the date of this report.