Regenda Limited (202345799)

Background

1. In July 2023 the resident reported antisocial behaviour (ASB) by her neighbours, including harassment, intimidation, and parking issues. She was unhappy with how the landlord handled these reports and raised a complaint.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. Reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB).
   2. The complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We found no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of:
   1. Reports of ASB.
   2. The complaint.

We have not made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

4. The landlord followed its ASB policy, investigated reports, and took proportionate steps to address the resident’s concerns.
5. Although there was a slight delay in the landlord issuing its stage 1 response, this was minimal and did not cause the resident any detriment.

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 have not investigated

6. The resident says the landlord discriminated against her when responding to her ASB reports and that its handling of these matters affected her health. We cannot make findings of discrimination, determine breaches of the Equality Act 2010, or decide liability for personal injury. The courts handle these types of disputes as they have the benefit of independent medical and legal evidence. We did not investigate these issues further. However, we can decide if a landlord should pay compensation for distress and inconvenience.

What we have investigated

7. This investigation focuses on the concerns raised in the resident’s formal complaints. We have reviewed the period from July 2023 to January 2024 to ensure the landlord had a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to those concerns.
8. The landlord’s ASB policy says that after it receives a report of ASB it will contact the complainant within 5 working days. The resident raised a complaint on 28 July 2023 about intimidation and harassment from her neighbours. The landlord spoke with her on 8 August 2023 to discuss the concerns. This was 2 working days outside the timescale set out in its ASB policy. However, this delay was minor and there is no evidence it caused the resident any detriment.
9. In its stage 1 response on 9 August 2023, the landlord confirmed it would visit on 14 August 2023, which it completed as agreed. Between August and October 2023, it took steps to address the ASB reports. It completed 2 action plans with the resident, recommended diary sheets, spoke with the alleged perpetrators twice, and spoke with a neighbour. It kept regular contact with the resident, asked for reports of further incidents, and signposted her to the police if she felt harassed. These actions were reasonable and in line with its ASB policy.
10. The resident reported further ASB on 9 October 2023, including concerns that someone had placed a glass bottle under her car. The landlord contacted her the following day to discuss the report and provided a leaflet explaining what it considered to be ASB. This was an appropriate response and was in line with its policy, which requires evidence that ASB has occurred before it can take formal enforcement action.
11. Following this conversation, the resident raised a further complaint on 11 October 2023. She said the member of staff she spoke to on 9 October 2023 had dismissed her concerns and that the landlord was not taking her ASB reports seriously. In its stage 1 response on 26 October 2023, the landlord said it had spoken with the member of staff and apologised for any distress caused. This was a reasonable response as it acted on the resident’s concerns, investigated internally, and apologised for the resident’s experience.
12. The landlord also explained that there was insufficient evidence to take formal action but confirmed it had spoken with the alleged perpetrator on 12 October 2023. It said it would keep the case open, provide updates, and complete a further action plan. This was reasonable, as it acknowledged the resident’s experience, explained its position clearly, and took proportionate action in line with its ASB policy.
13. Throughout November 2023, the landlord kept the case open and remained in contact with the resident. On 19 December 2023, the resident reported further concerns about her neighbour standing outside her property and a barking dog. The landlord said it could not act on people standing in communal areas, as there was no evidence of harassment or a tenancy breach. It also offered to open a noise nuisance case and explained that the local authority would manage this separately and could install noise‑monitoring equipment if needed. These actions were appropriate and in line with its ASB policy.
14. In its stage 2 response on 9 January 2024, the landlord confirmed that it had managed the resident’s reports in line with its ASB policy. It explained that the case would remain open and that it would arrange a visit to agree another action plan. It also offered to install a privacy window screen as a practical measure to address the resident’s concerns. This was a reasonable response. It acknowledged the issues raised, explained its position, and committed to continue to investigate the situation.
15. The landlord visited the resident on 18 January 2024. It confirmed that the ASB case would remain open and asked the resident to continue reporting any further incidents. In May 2024, it installed privacy screens to the windows and closed the case. These actions were appropriate and in line with the commitments it made in its stage 2 response.
16. Overall, the landlord acted in line with its ASB policy. It stayed in contact with the resident, agreed and followed action plans, investigated, and took practical steps to address the reports of ASB.

17. The landlord handled the resident’s complaint during the period when the 2022 edition of the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) applied. While the Code was not statutory at the time, landlords were expected to follow it. We have therefore considered the landlord’s handling of the complaint against the Code, in addition to the landlord’s own complaints policy. In doing so, we have taken a proportionate approach, focusing on whether any departures from the Code’s timescales or process caused the resident any detriment.
18. At the time of the complaint, the landlord used a 2 stage complaints process. It acknowledged complaints within 2 working days, provided stage 1 responses within 5 working days of acknowledgement, and stage 2 responses within 15 working days.
19. The resident raised a complaint on 28 July 2023. The landlord acknowledged the complaint and issued its stage 1 response within 7 working days, on 9 August 2023. This was in line with the timescales set out in its complaints policy.
20. The resident raised a further complaint on 11 October 2023. As this was more than 14 days after the landlord’s first stage 1 response, it acted in line with its policy by treating it as a new complaint and issuing a further stage 1 response. It provided its response on 26 October 2023, which was 3 working days late. This delay was minimal and did not cause the resident any detriment.
21. The resident escalated her complaint on 19 December 2023. The landlord issued its stage 2 response 12 working days later on 9 January 2024. This was in line with the timeframes set out in its policy.
22. Where there were slight delays in the landlord’s responses, these were limited, were addressed during the complaint process, and did not prevent the resident from progressing her complaint. We have not identified evidence that these delays caused her any detriment. As such, these matters do not amount to maladministration when assessed against the Code.

Learning

23. The landlord managed the ASB case effectively by following its policy, investigating reports, and taking proportionate steps to address the resident’s concerns.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

24. The landlord kept clear records of its investigations and decisions.

Communication

25. The landlord kept regular contact with the resident and clearly explained its actions and decisions throughout the complaint process.