London Borough of Hackney (202344723)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202344723

London Borough of Hackney

25 July 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 response to:
   1. The resident’s reports of antisocial behaviour (‘ASB.’)
   2. The resident’s request for a management transfer.

Determination (jurisdictional decision)

2. In accordance with paragraphs 41.c. and 42.e. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the complaints as set out above are outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

Reasons

3. When a complaint is brought to the Ombudsman, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.
4. The resident is a tenant of the landlord. The property is 1-bedroom flat in a block. The resident’s household includes 2 children, one of whom has a disability.
5. The resident is understood to have moved into the property in 2022 via a management transfer.
6. In early October 2023, the resident attempted to complain to the landlord about ASB related to a neighbour, their family members and visitors. This included staring, verbal comments, and incitement of other neighbours against her. She raised concerns about the impact on her and her children. She asked the landlord to address the ASB reports and move her to more suitable housing. The landlord responded that it was handling the correspondence as a service request, as it had not received the reports before, and confirmed it had logged an ASB case the following week.
7. The resident complained again in late October 2023 and the landlord logged a formal complaint. She reported further ASB and said the ongoing ASB impacted her and her family’s safety and wellbeing. She asked the landlord to urgently move her to more suitable housing.
8. Between October 2023 and May 2024, the resident contacted the landlord about ongoing ASB, harassment and criminal activity. This included her property being ‘egged,’ banging on doors and windows, deaths and disappearances of her cats, trespass, removal of toys, damage to a shed, her property being broken into, staring, and verbal altercations. She also sent medical information.
9. The landlord referred the reports to its wider ASB team, which investigated reports, contacted the resident and her neighbours, and liaised with the police. It asked to meet her at her home or its offices to discuss her request for rehousing, and also offered a joint visit with ASB staff, but she requested for correspondence to only be by email.
10. After some investigation by the landlord and the police, the resident was told there was no evidence for her allegations. She was invited to participate in mediation which she declined. She raised concerns the landlord had ignored police safeguarding reports that recommended to move her. She also raised concerns it had not investigated footage from nearby CCTV cameras.
11. The landlord responded at stage 1 on 24 May 2024.
    1. It detailed events and actions by the ASB team and police between October 2023 and May 2024. It noted that alleged perpetrators had denied allegations for some reports, and the police said they were taking no action for others. It said reasonable steps had been taken to investigate ASB.
    2. It noted it had asked to meet the resident at her home or its offices to discuss her request for rehousing. It noted her current banding and said staff would need to do an assessment to change this. It detailed her options to move and provided explanation about its lettings policy.
    3. It apologised for the delay in its response and the impact on the resident. It offered her £600.
12. The resident was unhappy with the response. She raised dissatisfaction with the landlord’s investigation of her ASB reports, lack of action for police safeguarding reports, and lack of action for medical information.
13. Between June and October 2024, the resident made further ASB and police reports. These included cat disappearances, incidents with residents on another road, a neighbour throwing an item at her property, her video doorbell being spraypainted, suspicious behaviour from neighbours, theft of a bike and laptop, trespass, and cotton buds being left on her shed.
14. The ASB team set out their position on the resident’s reports, attempted a joint visit with the housing team, asked to meet with her in person to review video footage she recorded, and arranged for her to meet with an ASB manager in August 2024. Their position was that it could not substantiate her allegations, after investigation of them and liaison with the police and other agencies. It also said it could not investigate cat disappearances and other criminal incidents.
15. The landlord responded at stage 2 on 3 October 2024.
    1. It noted the resident complained it had failed to act on medical information. It noted it had previously asked to meet her at her home or its offices to discuss her request for rehousing and arrange emergency accommodation if required. It said this was in line with policy and provided further explanation.
    2. It noted the resident complained about its response to her ASB reports and threats against her. It noted it had investigated these and liaised with the police and CCTV team, but there was no evidence to substantiate allegations. It noted it had reviewed video footage she supplied and offered to visit her to view this on her phone, as this was unclear.
    3. It noted the resident complained about a lack of action for police safeguarding reports. It said this referred to a standard victim form that police completed as part of their normal process. It explained that a risk assessment it did was for internal purposes.
    4. It acknowledged and apologised that some emails from the resident were not responded to and overlooked, and that its response was delayed. It offered £730 for the level of service that she had experienced and its complaint handling.
16. The resident has continued to state dissatisfaction with the landlord’s lack of action for ASB reports, police safeguarding reports, and her request to be rehoused.
17. In March and April 2025, the resident sent pre-action letters to the landlord, then submitted a legal claim that was issued at court.
18. The legal claim concerns the landlord’s response to the resident’s ASB reports, its lack of safeguarding, and its failings to review the suitability of her housing, and she refers to the Ombudsman’s reference for this case in the claim. She has also told us “I am currently engaged in judicial review proceedings concerning the same underlying issues raised in this complaint namely, the landlord’s failure to address anti-social behaviour and to act upon safeguarding concerns.”
19. A high court judge considered the resident’s claim on 29 May 2025. They have ‘stayed’ the proceedings in order for her to set out her claim in a certain format.
20. The Housing Ombudsman Scheme sets out how the Ombudsman investigates complaints.
21. Paragraph 41.c. says we cannot consider complaints which “concern matters that are the subject of court proceedings or were the subject of court proceedings where judgement on the merits was given.”
22. Paragraph 42.e. says we may not consider complaints which “concern matters where a complainant has or had the opportunity to raise the subject matter of the complaint as part of legal proceedings.”
23. This means that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints where there are court/legal proceedings on the same issues, and where a complainant has the opportunity to raise other issues as part of the proceedings.
24. As noted above, court/legal proceedings for the resident’s case have been ‘stayed.’ Where proceedings are ‘stayed’ these are not ended, they are still ‘issued’ but ‘paused.’
25. As such, while we understand this may come as a disappointment, in line with paragraphs 41.c. and 42.e. we are unable to investigate the resident’s concerns.