From 13 January 2026, we will no longer accept new case enquiries by email. Please use our online complaint form to bring a complaint to us. This helps us respond to you more quickly.

Need help? Other ways to contact us.

Together Housing Association Limited (202422315)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202422315

Together Housing Association Limited

4 September 2025

 

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
    1. Concerns about the conduct of a staff member.
    2. Reports of harassment from a neighbour.

Background

  1. The resident has an assured tenancy which began in August 2021. The property is a 1-bedroom terraced property. The landlord is a housing association. The resident has a mental health condition which the landlord is aware of.
  2. The resident has reported issues with her neighbour from 2022. On 24 July 2024 the resident complained to the landlord that her neighbour had asked an employee of the landlord to spy on her by looking into her rear garden and taking photographs. The resident said this was an invasion of her privacy and a form of harassment from her neighbour.
  3. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 20 August 2024. The landlord confirmed it had spoken to the employee about the reported incident. The employee, who was a repair operative, confirmed he had taken photographs of the neighbour’s gutters both before and after completing the repair, which was normal practice. The employee said he was sorry if the resident thought he had looked into her garden but said this was not the case. The landlord said it would forward the resident’s report about the neighbour to her neighbourhood officer to investigate. The landlord apologised for any distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident.
  4. On 21 August 2024 the resident escalated her complaint because she was unhappy with the landlord’s response. She maintained the employee had taken photographs of her garden and asked the landlord to show her the photographs. She said the employee and her neighbour were talking about her and her garden and she had CCTV evidence of this. She said she wanted the landlord to take disciplinary action against the employee and for him to have more training on women’s rights, disability, and privacy. She also said she wanted the landlord to take tenancy enforcement action against her neighbour.
  5. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 6 September 2024. It confirmed no disciplinary action would be taken against the employee. The landlord said it had reached this decision following an evaluation of the evidence. It said the current evidence did not show there had been a fault with the employee’s conduct and did not warrant any further action. It confirmed the employee was up to date on all training. which included women’s rights, disability, and privacy training.
  6. In relation to the resident’s report of harassment from her neighbour. The landlord said it had reviewed the CCTV footage and checked the landlord’s Anti Social Behaviour Policy (ASB). It said there was no evidence to conclude the neighbour was responsible for the employee’s actions. The landlord said it was unable to share the images taken by the employee because they were of the neighbour’s property and therefore personal data. It could not share these because it may be a breach of data protection regulations.
  7. The resident has told us she felt she could not use her garden because her neighbour spied on her. She said the landlord had not taken her report seriously and had not considered her mental health when investigating her reports.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. In the resident’s complaint to the landlord, she said the landlord should take disciplinary action against the employee. It is outside the Ombudsman’s role to consider or comment on how a landlord should deal with identified service failings by an individual member of staff, in terms of any disciplinary proceedings or employment matters. This is in line with paragraph 42.h. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. However, we can consider the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns and whether it was fair and reasonable.
  2. We are aware the resident has reported ASB and harassment from her neighbour since July 2022. However, we can see the resident did not report any new incidents concerning her neighbour from February 2023 until the incident in July 2024. We are also aware the resident has continued to report issues concerning her neighbour after the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response in August 2024.
  3. We will focus our investigation into the issues raised in the resident’s July 2024 complaint until it completed the landlord’s internal complaint procedure in August 2024. If the resident remains dissatisfied with the landlord’s actions after this date she should raise these with her landlord.

Concerns about staff conduct

  1. The resident complained that an employee of the landlord, who was completing a repair at her neighbour’s property, had looked over into her garden, taken photographs, and discussed her garden with her neighbour. She said this had invaded her privacy.
  2. There is no reference to the conduct of staff or contractors in the landlord’s Repair and Maintenance Policy. However, when a resident raises an issue about the conduct of an employee, we would expect the landlord to complete an investigation into the issues raised and provide the resident with a response to their concerns.
  3. In its complaint responses the landlord explained it had spoken to the employee involved and viewed the CCTV evidence provided by the resident. It explained that it was normal practice for its repair operatives to take before and after photographs of the work they were completing. It also said the operative had apologised if the resident had thought he had looked into her garden and assured her this was not the case. Based on its investigation it had reached the conclusion that the employee’s behaviour did not warrant any further action.
  4. The landlord explained in its complaint response that the employee had taken the photographs for a legitimate reason and they had not been of the resident’s garden. It also explained that the photographs were subject to data protection legislation and it could not share them without the subject matter’s consent. In this case that would be the neighbour.
  5. While the resident may not agree with the landlord’s decision, we are satisfied that the response was fair and reasonable. This is because the landlord investigated the resident’s concerns, which included speaking to the employee involved, considered the CCTV evidence, and provided the resident with an explanation of its decision.
  6. There was therefore no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about the conduct of an employee.

Report of harassment from a neighbour

  1. It is evident that this situation has been distressing to the resident. It may help to firstly explain that the Ombudsman’s role is not to decide if the actions of the neighbour amounted to ASB, but rather, whether the landlord dealt with the resident’s reports about this appropriately and in line with its policies and procedures.
  2. The resident complained that her neighbour had harassed her by encouraging an employee of the landlord to take photographs of her rear garden in July 2024.
  3. The landlord’s ASB and Hate Crime Policy defines harassment as ‘Verbal abuse, offensive communications, stalking, and malicious activity intended to cause distress’.
  4. When the landlord receives a new report of ASB its policy and procedure says it will:
    1. Assess and prioritise the report at the point of contact.
    2. Assign a priority level which is dependant upon the severity of the report made.
    3. Refer cases of harassment to its triage team for further assessment.
    4. Complete a risk assessment on the complainant.
    5. Log the report on its housing management system, even when it does not consider it to be ASB.
  5. The landlord provided a response to the resident’s report within its stage 2 complaint response. However, we have not seen any evidence to show it complied with its ASB policy and procedure which says it will complete the above steps when it receives a new ASB report. This was a failure.
  6. Although there was no permanent impact on the resident, the failure adversely affected her because the landlord did not assess and respond to her ASB report in line with its policy. This made the resident feel the landlord was not taking her report seriously. This would amount to maladministration.
  7. Given the time that has passed since the incident, it would not be proportionate to order the landlord to revisit the issue and complete an investigation. Instead, we have ordered the landlord pay the resident £200 compensation to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused.
  8. We have also ordered the landlord log the resident’s report on its housing management system to ensure there is a record of her report.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s concerns about the conduct of an employee.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of harassment.

Orders

  1. The landlord must, within 4 weeks of the date of this report:
    1. Provide the resident with a written apology for the failures identified in this report. The apology must come from a manager.
    2. pay the resident compensation of £200 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the resident’s report of harassment.
    3. All payments must be paid directly to the resident and not credited to the rent account unless otherwise agreed by the resident.
    4. Ensure the resident’s report is logged correctly on the landlord’s housing management system.
  2. The landlord must provide the Ombudsman with evidence of how it has complied with the above orders within 4 weeks of the date of this report.