Citizen Housing Group Limited (202316638)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202316638

Citizen Housing

6 February 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. This complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB) and request for an electronic gate to be installed.

Background

  1. The resident is a leaseholder. The landlord is the freeholder of the building.
  2. The resident wrote to the landlord on 22 May 2023 to request it install electronic wall-to-wall access gates. She said the entrance to the building car park required an electronic gate due to safety concerns, criminal damage to the property and litter in the communal areas. She said she had been experiencing problems due to members of the public using the walkway through the car park for 10 years.
  3. The landlord acknowledged this and told the resident it would respond to her query once it had a chance to consider the information she provided. The resident called the landlord on 1 June 2023, 5 June 2023 and 9 June 2023 chasing it for updates on her request.
  4. The resident raised a complaint with the landlord on 15 June 2023 as she had received no communication about her request. She also sent in evidence about an incident in the car park which she had reported to the police on 22 June 2023.
  5. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 28 June 2023. It said it was in discussion with its neighbourhood and estates team and was currently investigating what steps it could take to alleviate ASB concerns. It said it would also write to all residents in the block to ensure they were closing the communal doors and promptly reporting any damage to equipment in the building. It said it would undertake this action before considering installing gates.
  6. The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 of the complaints process on 18 July 2023 as she had heard no further updates about her request for a gate. She also said she had seen no contact from the landlord reminding residents to close the door.
  7. The landlord responded to the resident on 15 August 2023. It said that it was still in the process of obtaining information about the land where the electric gate would potentially sit since it did not own this land. It also said it had fed back to its local teams to ensure that it was communicating better with residents and acting on any reports of ASB.
  8. The resident wrote to the Ombudsman on 6 September 2023. She was unhappy that the landlord had not provided an answer on if it would be installing an electric gate. She was also unhappy that the landlord had not provided certainty about the measures it would be taking to provide safety, describing the stairwells and car park as a magnet for ASB. She said the environment was unsafe. The resident has advised that, to resolve her complaint, she would like the landlord to finally erect the wall-to-wall electronic gate.

Assessment and findings

The scope of this investigation

  1. Following the conclusion of the complaints process, the landlord and resident have continued to be in discussions about the installation of electric gates. The Ombudsman is only able to consider matters that have first been through the landlord’s complaints process. This means the Ombudsman will not consider as part of this investigation any events following the stage 2 complaint response.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of ASB and request for an electronic gate to be installed

  1. The landlord’s ASB policy states that it will ‘not tolerate ASB or hate crime’ in the neighbourhoods that it operates in and says it ‘will work in conjunction with our partners to put a stop to this behaviour’. It says that when dealing with ASB, it will ‘maintain a victim centred approach by putting residents first, understanding any impact upon them and liaising’ with its partner organisations.
  2. The resident has said that she feels the car park and premises of the apartment are not safe due to unauthorised access by members of the public. The landlord has informed the Ombudsman that the complex where the building is located currently has a public right of way leading through the parking facilities.
  3. In the year prior to the resident’s request for the electronic gate, there was a single report of an issue with the car park on 10 October 2022 where a member of the public had urinated and defecated near the bins. The resident also mentioned in her May 2023 letter to the landlord that in March 2023 there had been an issue with a drunk individual kicking cars and ripping off wing mirrors in the car park. The resident made a further report, whilst the complaint was ongoing, of a rough sleeper in a communal area on 7 August 2023. The resident also mentioned that she had reported fly-tipping to the police although the date of these reports is not clear.
  4. Given the frequency of the ASB reports, it was reasonable that the landlord initially attempted to manage the ASB as outlined in its stage 1 complaint response. This was fair given the size of the project required to install an electronic gate in this location. The resident mentioned that the landlord had already explored what actions it could take to stop ASB at a consultation about installing an electronic gate 10 years earlier. However, given the length of time since this earlier consultation, it was reasonable that the landlord said it would explore what could be done to manage the ASB.
  5. The landlord’s actions in relation to the resident’s reports of ASB were unclear. Given the perpetrators were not tenants of the landlord, tenancy enforcement action was not possible. Nevertheless, the landlord could have outlined the specific steps it was taking. It also should have provided her with information about how to report ASB and what actions were available to it in relation to this. This would have demonstrated a victim centred approach as per its ASB policy.
  6. The landlord also said that it was speaking with internal teams and external organisations about managing the ASB. However, it has not provided evidence of these conversations or demonstrated any actions it took following these. It also has not shown that it spoke to the resident following this or provided her with information about what it would be doing to manage the ASB. The landlord’s failure to document this to the resident was unreasonable.
  7. The landlord also said it would write to all of the residents in the building, reminding them about actions they could take to keep the building secure. The resident said she never received this so believed the landlord may not have sent this. Given the lack of evidence provided by the landlord about its follow-up actions in relation to the ASB, the Ombudsman cannot say that the landlord dealt with the ASB in line with its policy.
  8. The landlord said in its stage 2 complaint response that it supports the resident’s desire for an electronic gate. It appears to have taken reasonable steps towards investigating the installation by speaking with the relevant teams, seeking advice about the land where the gate would need to be placed and speaking with the local authority’s land registry to try and find out more about ownership. It is unclear what more the landlord could have done within the timescale the complaint covers.
  9. The landlord would be unable to install a gate on land that it did not own without having the prerequisite permissions in place. The delays in obtaining information from the relevant planning authorities were not the fault of the landlord.
  10. However, the landlord’s communication with the resident could have been better. It failed to respond to her on several occasions, often after promising to do so. This happened following her original letter on 25 May 2023 where she chased the landlord for a response on 1 June 2023, 5 June 2023 and 9 June 2023. Following the stage 1 complaint response, the resident continued to chase the landlord for proper updates throughout July 2023 before she eventually escalated her complaint to stage 2 of the complaints process.
  11. The landlord recognised there were communications failures in its stage 2 complaint response, saying it had fed this back to staff. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to offer the resident some compensation given these failings caused her inconvenience.
  12. The landlord should therefore pay the resident £200 compensation. This is for its service failure in following up on the ASB reports and communicating with her. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance which recommends figures in this range where there have been failings that have caused a resident distress and inconvenience.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of ASB and request for an electronic gate.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this letter, the landlord should:
    1. Pay the resident £200 for the inconvenience caused to her by the failings in its handling of her reports of ASB and request for an electronic gate.
    2. Apologise to the resident in writing.
    3. Write to the resident to outline what steps it has implemented, or will implement, to manage any ASB in the car park and around the premises. This should also include information on who she should make reports to and what actions it is taking in relation to these reports.
    4. Provide evidence to this Service it has done so.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should write to the resident to provide her with an update on the status of the wall-to-wall electronic gate request.