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

Westminster City Council (202118004)

Back to Top

 

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202118004

Westminster City Council

24 August 2023

 

Our approach

What the Ombudsman can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman must determine whether a complaint comes within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. The Ombudsman seeks to resolve disputes wherever possible but cannot investigate complaints that fall outside of this.

In deciding whether a complaint falls within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction, the Ombudsman will carefully consider all the evidence provided by the parties and the circumstances of the case.

The complaint

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports about antisocial behaviour (ASB).

Background and summary of events

Background

  1. The resident has been a secured tenant at the property of the landlord since 1 November 2004. The landlord is a local authority.
  2. The resident has reported issues with ASB from his neighbour for a number of years prior to this complaint. The Ombudsman has previously investigated these reports in case numbers 202000319 and 202102498. The most recent of these was determined in September 2022 and covered a period up to the landlord’s stage two response in September 2021.
  3. The Ombudsman’s investigation found there had been service failure due to a delay in the landlord’s correspondence; however, there was no maladministration found in relation to its investigation of the ASB. This determination was upheld after a formal review.
  4. The resident has also made a request for a management transfer in relation to the ASB he is experiencing. A complaint relating to this request was investigated by the Ombudsman in case number 202200584. This was determined on 31 July 2023 and found no maladministration with the landlord’s decision not to offer a management transfer.

Summary of events

  1. Following the landlord’s stage two response in September 2021, the resident continued to make regular reports of ASB to both the landlord and the local authority. This report will not detail every communication, but the Ombudsman notes that the resident kept the landlord well informed throughout the period of the complaint.
  2. These reports were of a similar nature as before and included concerns about noises from his neighbour’s property, such as banging, scraping, DIY noise, shouting, excessive coughing, and other similar noises. These occurred at all hours of the day and night. The resident considers these noises to be deliberate and targeted.
  3. On 20 October 2021, the local authority’s noise investigation team provided an update on their investigations. They noted that the outcome of their noise monitoring equipment investigation and their professional witness’s investigation was that there was no evidence of statutory nuisance. As a result, they would not be pursuing any further action, nor would they respond to any further reports of a similar nature.
  4. The resident then pursued a formal complaint against the local authority. The local authority provided a stage one response on 3 November 2021, and a stage two response on 3 December 2021. The local authority detailed the steps it took in its investigation. It reiterated that it had not witnessed any noise that may be considered statutory nuisance and that it would take no further action.
  5. On 5 January 2022, following a telephone discussion with the landlord about his ongoing concerns about ASB, the resident reiterated his request for a management transfer.
  6. As noted above, on 1 February 2022, the resident made a formal complaint relating to his request for a management transfer. The landlord provided its stage one response on 21 February 2022, and a stage two response on 24 March 2022. It noted the requirements for a management transfer and explained why the resident’s circumstances did not meet these requirements.
  7. The Ombudsman notes that the landlord has continued to reach out to the resident to offer assistance with bidding on new suitable properties.
  8. To date, the resident has continued to make regular reports about ASB that are of a similar nature to his previous reports. It is evident that the local authority briefly reopened its investigation as the resident had reported noise from an exercise machine, which differed from his earlier reports. However, the local authority has not taken any further action in relation to these reports.

Assessment

  1. Paragraph 42(a) of the Scheme notes as follows:

42. The Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion:

a) are made prior to having exhausted a member’s complaints procedure, unless there is evidence of a complaint handling failure and the Ombudsman is satisfied that the member has not taken action within a reasonable timescale.

  1. The Ombudsman requires that both parties be afforded the opportunity to provide their position about a complaint. This is achieved through a landlord’s internal complaints procedure, where a landlord will provide its position in its stage one and stage two responses. In accordance with the Scheme, only once the internal complaints procedure is complete can the Ombudsman investigate the complaint.
  2. The Ombudsman considers there to be a difference between a report and a formal complaint. While the resident has continued to report ASB, it is not evident that a new formal complaint has been raised since the landlord’s previous complaint response in September 2022. Nor is it evident that the landlord has carried out any further complaint investigations or issued any further formal complaint responses since this time.
  3. The resident has repeatedly articulated his dissatisfaction with the landlord’s actions. However, the contents of his reports remained largely the same as those the landlord had previously investigated on multiple occasions. It was therefore reasonable that it did not use its initiative to reinvestigate these issues as a formal complaint in the absence of a specific request.
  4. It may also be the case that the landlord would decline to open a new complaint given that the nature of the reports has not changed. In such circumstances, the Ombudsman would expect the landlord to clearly articulate in writing why this would be the case.

Determination (jurisdictional decision)

  1. After carefully considering all the evidence, the resident’s complaint about the landlord’s response to his reports about ASB is outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.