LiveWest Homes Limited (202335346)

Decision
Case ID	202335346
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	LiveWest Homes Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	28 November 2025

Background

The resident lives in a 2-bedroom house with her daughter. She has physical disabilities known to the landlord.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
1. Reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB).
2. Concerns about staff conduct.
3. Associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

We have found that there was:
1. Maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of ASB.
2. Reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about staff conduct.
3. Service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

Reports of ASB

The landlord did not respond promptly to the resident’s ASB reports, taking 6 months to open a case and speak to neighbours. This was a missed opportunity to intervene earlier and potentially prevent escalation. Once the case was opened, its actions were proportionate and in line with its policy, and it offered additional support to the resident despite being unable to take enforcement action.

Staff conduct

The landlord investigated the resident’s concerns appropriately. Although its initial response failed to consider tone of communication and the impact on the resident, its final response acknowledged these failings, and it took reasonable steps to put things right.

Complaint handling

Though the landlord’s complaint responses were timely, it did not identify service failings which had occurred in its handling of the resident’s ASB reports, despite available evidence.

Putting things right

Where we find service failure, maladministration or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction.

Orders

Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set.

Order	What the landlord must do	Due date
1	Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure: The apology is provided by a senior member of staff. The apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 07 January 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £250 made up as follows: £200 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by the errors in its handling of her reports of ASB. £50 for the complaint handling failures identified. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. The landlord may deduct from the total figure any payments it has already made.	No later than 07 January 2026
3	ASB order The landlord must contact the resident to discuss the reported ongoing ASB issues and provide her with an update on its position. The landlord should provide a clear action plan to both us and the resident by the due date, highlighting what action it has taken and/or intends to take to assist the resident, in line with its policies and procedures.	No later than 07 January 2026

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

Our recommendations
It is recommended that the landlord pays the resident the £200 previously offered for its failures relating to concerns about staff conduct, if it has not already done so. Our reasonable redress finding is made on the basis of this being paid.
It is recommended that the landlord contacts the resident to provide her with an update on its position regarding her exceptional move and application for rehousing.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
December 2022 to November 2023	The resident made multiple ASB reports to the landlord concerning 3 neighbours.
4 December 2023	The resident complained to the landlord. She said she was unhappy with how it was handling her reports of ASB.
14 December 2023	The landlord issued its stage 1 response. It did not uphold the complaint. It said it was satisfied that the resident’s reports had been handled appropriately in line with its ASB policy and within expected timescales. It explained that her ASB cases had been closed due to lack of evidence.
19 December 2023	The resident escalated her complaint. She said she felt the landlord was being “neglectful” and encouraging further abuse from her neighbours.
8 January 2024	The landlord issued its stage 2 response. It did not uphold the complaint. It said it was satisfied that it had worked closely with partner agencies and within the scope of its policies. It explained there was little clear evidence of ASB and in those circumstances, it could sometimes be difficult to find a solution. It offered the resident an exceptional move.
16 January 2024	The resident complained to the landlord about how a staff member had spoken to her during a telephone call regarding her ASB reports.
30 January 2024	The landlord issued its stage 1 response to the resident’s second complaint. It did not uphold the complaint. It advised it had reviewed its records and spoken to the staff member. It said it could find no evidence that they had acted in an unprofessional manner.
30 January 2024	The resident escalated her complaint. She said she felt the landlord had failed to acknowledge or take responsibility for the staff member’s “abuse”.
13 February 2024	The landlord issued its stage 2 response. It partially upheld the complaint. It acknowledged that it could have approached the telephone call with the resident in a different way. It apologised and offered £200 compensation for its communication.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident asked us to investigate, as she said the harassment from her neighbours was ongoing and there had been little progress in addressing the ASB. She said she felt the landlord’s behaviour towards her seemed to “run through” several members of its staff.
25 November 2025	During contact with us, the resident said the ASB continued. As an outcome, she said she would like the landlord to move her to another property.

What we found and why

The circumstances of this complaint are well known by the parties involved, so it is not necessary to detail everything that’s happened or comment on all the information we’ve reviewed. We’ve only included the key information that forms the basis of our decision of whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of ASB
Finding	Maladministration

What we have not investigated

The resident said she had experienced issues related to ASB for the last 6 years. In the interests of fairness, and considering the availability of evidence, this investigation will focus on events from December 2022 onwards, covering the 12-month period prior to the complaint being raised. This approach is in line with the landlord’s complaints policy and the available evidence.
The resident continued to report issues related to ASB after the landlord’s final complaint response. Again in the interests of fairness, we have limited the scope of this investigation to the issues raised during the landlord’s internal complaints process. We will therefore consider events up to 8 January 2024, but the landlord needs to be given a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to any new issues that occurred after this time. The resident can address any new issues directly with the landlord. She can progress this as a new formal complaint if required, which she may escalate to us for separate investigation if she is dissatisfied with the landlord’s final response.

What we have investigated

The landlord’s ASB policy outlines examples of issues that may be reported and categorises them as either ASB, tenancy management matters, or lifestyle differences. It defines verbal abuse, harassment, and intimidation as ASB, and pet nuisance as a tenancy management issue. Parking disputes, problems with bins and neighbour disagreements are considered lifestyle differences.
Between December 2022 and June 2023, the resident made 24 reports to the landlord involving 2 neighbours (referred to in this report as Neighbours A and B, who were both tenants of the landlord). The reports included, but were not limited to, dogs urinating and fouling in her garden, dogs off their lead, bin placement, parking issues, and verbal abuse.
Despite the volume of reports from the resident between December 2022 and June 2023, the landlord did not open an ASB case. While most issues were not considered ASB under its policy, the resident had reported several instances of verbal abuse, explaining she felt victimised due to her disabilities and harassed. The landlord offered to open an ASB case on 15 February 2023 so these concerns could be investigated further. However, the records do not show the resident’s response or explain why the case was not opened at that time, indicating poor record keeping.
The landlord took some reasonable steps during this period – such as offering mediation, reviewing video footage, attending a multi-agency meeting, signposting the resident to the local authority for parking advice, and offering to speak to the resident’s neighbours. However, it did not open an ASB case when it should have. The resident’s reports of verbal abuse and harassment fell under ASB as defined in the landlord’s policy, so a case should have been opened following the initial report on 7 February 2023. Its failure to do so was a shortcoming, as it delayed key actions, including speaking to the neighbours, which were not completed until much later.
In August 2023, the frequency of ASB reports increased significantly, with the resident reporting 16 incidents between 4 and 30 August. These reports were similar in nature to earlier concerns but also included allegations of hate crime. At this stage, the resident reported issues involving Neighbours A and B, as well as another neighbour (referred to in this report as Neighbour C, who was a tenant of another landlord). The landlord opened an ASB case on 30 August 2023, which was appropriate given the escalation and nature of the reports. However, this was 6 months after the resident’s initial report of verbal abuse, which was a failing. Had the landlord opened a case sooner, it may have been able to intervene earlier and potentially prevent the situation from escalating.
After opening the ASB case, the landlord provided the resident with regular action plans, reviewed the case with her at least monthly, and checked video footage she had submitted. The landlord investigated by speaking to Neighbours A and B about the reports and their tenancy terms. It issued advisory letters and action plans to neighbours. It also liaised with Neighbour C’s landlord and other partner agencies. These actions were proportionate and in line with its policy.
On 5 October 2023, the landlord spoke to the resident and explained that many of her reports were not considered ASB, so it could not take tenancy action. While this was understandably frustrating for the resident, it was appropriate for the landlord to update her and set out its limitations. The landlord again offered mediation as an alternative resolution, which was reasonable in the circumstances, but the resident declined.
The landlord’s policy highlights the importance of partnership working, which it demonstrated throughout the investigation. On 10 October 2023, the landlord attended a multi-agency meeting with the local authority and police, where it agreed that a letter would be sent to the resident and Neighbours A and B. The letter, issued on 23 October 2023, confirmed that after review, all agencies agreed most of the reported behaviour was due to lifestyle differences and urged all parties to follow the action plans. This collaborative approach was appropriate and in line with the landlord’s policy.
The landlord reiterated its position in its stage 1 response on 14 December 2023 and its final response on 8 January 2024. While it confirmed it could not take enforcement action, it acknowledged the ongoing impact on the resident and outlined available support. It again offered mediation and proposed “BeMe” cognitive behavioural therapy. It signposted the resident to relevant services and charities, including Citizens Advice, ASB Help, and Stand Against Racism and Equality. It also offered an exceptional move and said it had sought input from its specialist ASB team to help manage the case and “reintegrate the community”. These were positive and proactive steps, demonstrating a commitment to supporting the resident despite its limitations in relation to enforcement action.
The resident told us that the situation has impacted her physical and emotional wellbeing. While we are not medical specialists and cannot determine impact on health, we can consider the distress and inconvenience caused by any failings in the landlord’s response.
The landlord did not identify any failings in its complaint investigation, and as a result, did not offer any compensation as part of its complaint responses. We consider a payment of £200 to be appropriate. This has been calculated in accordance with our remedies guidance, which recommends awards of this level where there have been failures that adversely affected the resident, that the landlord has not acknowledged or put right.
During contact with us in November 2025, the resident advised that ASB was still ongoing, indicating the issues remained unresolved. The landlord confirmed it was managing further reports under an open case. The resident said that she had accepted the landlord’s offer of an exceptional move and wished to relocate to another property but had not received any offers. A recommendation has been made in relation to this matter.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about staff conduct
Finding	Reasonable redress

When complaints about staff conduct arise, our role is not to determine misconduct or direct disciplinary action. Instead, our role is to assess whether the landlord conducted a proportionate investigation into the resident’s concerns and acted in a fair and reasonable manner overall.
On 12 and 16 January 2024, the resident spoke with the landlord’s ASB officer, who had recently taken over managing her reports. On 16 January 2024, she complained that the officer had been “rude and obnoxious” during the calls. She described the experience as “extremely detrimental” and said she felt the landlord should have been more supportive given the circumstances.
As part of its investigation, the landlord reviewed notes and records on its housing management system and confirmed it had consulted the relevant staff member. This shows that the resident’s concerns were considered appropriately.
In its stage 1 response on 30 January 2024, the landlord advised that “difficult and probing” conversations were sometimes necessary when discussing ASB reports. It said there was no evidence that the ASB officer had acted inappropriately or unprofessionally, which was consistent with the available evidence. However, the landlord did not consider the tone of the officer’s communication or the reported impact on the resident, which was a shortcoming. This likely caused her distress and inconvenience and contributed to her decision to escalate the complaint.
In its final response on 13 February 2024, the landlord demonstrated that it had reviewed its handling of the resident’s concerns and the stage 1 response. It acknowledged there were some failings, including that the telephone call could have been approached differently with greater consideration for the resident’s vulnerabilities. The landlord apologised for not recognising the impact on her in its initial response. It also committed to discussing with the relevant staff member how to adapt communication to meet customer needs. These actions were reasonable and proportionate in the circumstances, and the landlord appropriately implemented them following its final response.
In its final response, the landlord offered £200 in compensation to recognise the impact of its ineffective communication. This offer was appropriate and in line with our remedies guidance for circumstances where there has been a failure by the landlord in the service it provided which adversely affected the resident.
After the complaints process ended on 13 February 2024, the landlord contacted the resident in May 2024 to advise that it would develop a plan for an alternative staff member to manage communication with her regarding the ASB case. The resident confirmed she was satisfied with that arrangement.

Complaint	The landlord’s complaint handling
Finding	Service failure

The landlord operated a 2-stage complaints process at the time of the resident’s complaint. Its policy stated it would respond to complaints within 10 working days of receipt at stage 1. At stage 2, it said it would acknowledge complaints within 5 working days and respond within 7 working days from the acknowledgement.
The landlord adhered to the timescales outlined in its complaints policy. However, there were other failures. The stage 2 complaint was the landlord’s final opportunity to review its handling of the substantive issue, yet it did not identify failures in its service that had occurred in managing the resident’s ASB reports. This was inconsistent with the available evidence and indicates a lack of thoroughness in its review process.
We consider a payment of £50 to be appropriate compensation for the complaint handling failures. This is in accordance with our remedies guidance for circumstances where there was a failure by the landlord in the service it provided, which it did not appropriately acknowledge or fully put right.

Learning

The landlord’s complaint handling was generally positive, particularly its stage 2 response to the resident’s concerns about staff conduct. The letter was detailed and reflective, acknowledged and apologised for the identified failures, and clearly set out the learning and actions it would take to address the issues.

Knowledge and information management (record keeping)

The landlord’s record keeping was generally robust, providing detailed records of communication with the resident. However, it should ensure that case files include explanations when procedures are not followed. In this case, it was unclear why an ASB case was not opened when the landlord offered on 15 February 2023.

Communication

We recognise that there was a high level of contact from the resident, but overall, the landlord’s communication was positive. It demonstrated learning from the complaint by identifying additional staff training focused on effective communication and meeting the needs of potentially vulnerable customers in a more person-centred manner.