Wandle Housing Association Limited (202419604)

Background

1. The resident and her son live in a ground floor flat. She complained about noise and harassment from her upstairs neighbour. She wanted the landlord to resolve the issues. The landlord was aware of the resident’s physical vulnerabilities.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s:
   1. Reports of anti-social behaviour (ASB).
   2. Associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s:
   1. Reports of ASB.
   2. Associated complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

ASB

4. The landlord did not clearly record the actions it took in response to the resident’s ASB report or how it assessed if these were in line with its policy. It did not take all reasonable steps in line with its ASB policy to gather evidence before stating there was no evidence of ASB.

The associated complaint

5. The landlord’s complaints team passed the resident’s stage 1 complaint back to the ASB service team. It delayed responding to both her stage 1 and stage 2 complaints.

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.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

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.

What we did not investigate

6. The resident said she experienced harassment and noise nuisance from her neighbour for 10 years. We encourage residents to raise complaints with their landlords when they happen. This helps ensure evidence is available and makes it easier to carry out a full investigation and make fair decisions. Because of this, and the evidence available, this assessment focuses only on events from 2023 onwards.

What we did investigate

7. The resident said the reported incidents caused her distress and anxiety. Our role is not to decide whether ASB happened or who was responsible. Instead, we look at how the landlord responded to the reports and whether it followed the right processes and good practice.
8. Within emails shared with this Service, the landlord refers to; interviews with the neighbour, home visits to the resident, the fitting of a ring doorbell camera and checking noise transference in the upstairs flat. We would expect to see detailed accounts of these actions, for example, through an internal case management system.
9. The landlord’s ASB policy states it will log cases and actions. The landlord did not provide this investigation with such records. This record keeping failure made it difficult to determine whether its actions on ASB reports were fair and reasonable in the circumstances.
10. The landlord did an ASB risk assessment in November 2022. This said the neighbour “continually harassed” the resident but did not provide specific examples of this. The landlord did not update this risk assessment following further reports. As part of this investigation’s information request, the landlord acknowledged it should have completed a risk assessment in October 2023. This was a failure when assessed against its ASB policy.
11. The landlord’s ASB policy says it will agree an action plan with the resident. The landlord created an internal action plan on 31 October 2023 but did not share this with the resident nor update it as the case progressed. It is unclear why an action plan was not created before this. Although the landlord responded to the resident’s reports. There was a delay between May 2023 and October 2023 in the landlord taking any meaningful action in response to the ASB reports. This likely left the resident uncertain as to whether the landlord intended to resolve her concerns.
12. The landlord did not set out the actions it would take or explain the actions the resident was expected to take. For example, regularly submitting and reviewing diary sheets or videos. In November 2023 it fitted a ring doorbell camera for the resident following reports of ASB from the police and the resident. It did not explain to the resident its expectations of how this footage would be reviewed or what it would consider.
13. The landlord took some appropriate actions in January and April 2024 when it sent warnings to the resident’s neighbour. These were regarding the use of cameras and language used in communal areas.
14. In April 2024 the resident said she was unhappy the neighbour had been given permission to install a ring bell camera on his post box. She felt this was intrusive and linked this to her reports of ongoing harassment. The landlord has not evidenced how it assessed this request. Given previous reports of intrusive camera use, it would have been reasonable for it to refer to an ASB action plan and ASB risk assessment when considering the neighbour’s request.
15. The landlord repeatedly said there was not enough evidence to take further action but missed opportunities to investigate further. For instance, in April 2024 the resident told the landlord its builders had made a complaint about the neighbour’s behaviour. The landlord failed to investigate this.
16. In autumn 2024 the landlord told the resident both hers and the neighbour’s ring doorbell cameras would have to be removed or repositioned. It would have been useful at this point to refer to any agreements it made when it installed the camera for the resident.
17. The resident agreed to her camera being repositioned, but the landlord continued to make this request of her over several months and in its stage 2 response. This was a failure by the landlord to action its proposed solution in a reasonable timeframe and likely contributed to the resident’s confusion.
18. The resident repeatedly reported excessive noise from her neighbour. The landlord acknowledged these reports but did not consider what actions it could take in line with its ASB policy to evidence this. For example, it would have been appropriate to support the resident to use a noise recording app or ask her to keep a noise diary.
19. The landlord’s ASB policy says it will take positive action to work with other agencies, including the police. Evidence showed the landlord communicated with the police regarding this case.
20. Although there was not sufficient evidence to pursue a criminal charge of harassment, the police officers involved did tell the landlord they were concerned about the neighbour’s behaviour. It would have been reasonable for it to consider further partnership working, such as a case conference, at this point. There is no evidence it considered police concerns when assessing the actions it could take in line with its ASB policy.
21. The landlord’s ASB policy says the level of evidence determines whether enforcement is possible. In its stage 2 response, the landlord said there was no evidence of ASB. However, it did not show it took all reasonable steps in line with its ASB policy to gather information before deciding there was not enough evidence, and this was a failure.
22. The landlord did not uphold the resident’s complaint as it said it had acted in line with its ASB policy. We have identified several failings outlined above. The resident said she was very distressed by the situation. The landlord did not acknowledge its failures to follow policy between January 2023 and January 2025 and did not take steps in line with our dispute resolution principles to put things right. We have therefore ordered the landlord to pay compensation in line with our remedies guidance and respond to the resident’s ASB reports in line with its policy.

23. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code sets out when and how a landlord should respond to complaints. The relevant Code in this case is the 2024 edition. Our findings are that the landlord:
    1. Has a published complaints policy that meets the Code’s response times.
    2. Did not acknowledge the June 2024 stage 1 complaint within its policy timescales. This delayed the resident receiving a response by 2.5 months. The landlord incorrectly allocated the complaint back to its ASB team when it was clear that she was expressing dissatisfaction with its handling of her ASB reports.
    3. Acknowledged the complaint on 5 September 2024 and responded to this within its complaints policy.
    4. Did not acknowledge the resident’s stage 2 escalation on 31 July 2024, nor in December 2024.
    5. Did not record the reasons why the resident escalated her complaint in December 2024.
    6. Responded to the stage 2 complaint 5 months outside of its policy. This delayed the resident in bringing her complaint to us and caused her time and trouble in having to ask on multiple occasions for a response to her complaint.
24. We have ordered compensation for the time and trouble caused to the resident by the landlord’sdelays in acknowledging, and responding to, the stage 1 and 2 complaints.

Learning

ASB

25. The landlord did not clearly record its actions and decision-making processes. This made it difficult for its staff to understand the case and assess actions already taken.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

26. As a member of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has an obligation to provide us with sufficient information to enable a thorough investigation. Poor record keeping has made it difficult to determine whether its actions in response to reports of ASB were fair and reasonable in the circumstances.

Communication

27. The landlord did not always respond to the resident in a timely manner. Setting clear timescales may have limited her time and trouble in asking for updates.