Anchor Hanover Group (202430192)

Background

1. The resident is a leaseholder of a one-bedroom bungalow. The landlord assigned the lease to her in February 2021.The resident reported to the landlord incidents of antisocial behaviour (ASB) from a neighbour.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about:
   1. The landlord’s handling of ASB.
   2. The landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found that:
   1. There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of ASB.
   2. There was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s handling of ASB 

4. The landlord did not show that it promoted the ASB case review.

The landlord’s complaint handling

5. There were delays in the landlord acknowledging and responding to the resident’s complaint in 2023 which were not in line with its complaints policy or the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (“our Code”). It also failed to explain why it changed its position when it refused to accept the resident’s complaint in 2024 and provide an acceptable exclusion in line with our Code.

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.

6. The landlord’s ASB policy recognises harassment, and verbal abuse can amount to ASB. It also indicates that it can offer mediation, will promote ASB case reviews, and commits it to working in partnership with other organisations, like the police and council, to address ASB. Its ASB resident help sheet explains that it will provide support and advice to residents where it cannot take direct action.
7. The resident reported ASB from the neighbour since February 2021. This includes reports involving a loss of light, and obstruction of a kitchen window. We determined a complaint (202119855) on 25 July 2023 relating to the resident’s concerns about the position of a boundary fence. This included an assessment of a fence affecting natural light, and a kitchen window obstruction. Under the Housing Ombudsman’s Scheme, we may not investigate matters which the resident seeks to raise which we or another Ombudsman has already determined. We have not investigated this aspect of the resident’s complaint. Instead, we have investigated the landlord’s handling of the ASB from 2023, and which exhausted the landlord’s complaint process.
8. It is unclear when the resident first reported ASB in 2023. The landlord was aware of issues on 5 April 2023. By 21 April 2023 the resident told the landlord she experienced ASB from the neighbour after she said they placed an offensive sign up, blocked her car on 20 April 2023, used offensive language, and planted trees which could have allowed rats to access her property. The landlord took the following appropriate steps when it:
   1. agreed to investigate the incident on 20 April 2023
   2. asked the resident for a clear image of the notice after it explained it needed this as the image the resident provided previously was illegible
   3. asked the resident for details of any witnesses
   4. told the resident she could report to it any inconsiderate parking involving neighbours using the estate parking facilities as their main parking
   5. told the resident it wrote to the neighbour and offered to speak with the neighbour
   6. said it reported the neighbour’s trees to the council to investigate whether this was in breach of any health and safety or environmental standards
   7. agreed to address and manage any encroachment from the neighbour’s trees on the resident’s property which may arise in future
   8. contacted the police for advice and told the resident she could report any ASB to the police in line with the advice it received
   9. suggested that the resident contact her local council who might be able to help as they did have the power / obligation to deal with ASB issues brought to their attention. It said that many councils had dedicated ASB teams and might be able to refer the issue to an independent mediation service.
9. These were all reasonable steps for the landlord to take because they were in line with its ASB policy. While the resident wanted the landlord to take further action it explained several times that the alleged perpetrator of the ASB (neighbour) was not a tenant. This meant that it had no legal relationship with the neighbour, and this restricted what action it could take. While the resident initially disputed this, she has now accepted no legal relationship exists between the landlord and her neighbour. The landlord was correct to identify the limitations over what it could do in line with its ASB resident help sheet.
10. However, the landlord’s ASB policy states it will promote the ASB case review (formally known as the Community Trigger). Landlords must also consider the ASB case review in line with the legal framework set out in Antisocial Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, s 104. The ASB policy also committed it to working in partnership with the council to address ASB and did not restrict this to where the reported ASB was from tenants. Although the landlord suggested that the resident contact her council, we have not seen any evidence that it considered whether the ASB case review was appropriate and that it promoted this to the resident.
11. We cannot say the outcome for the resident would have been different had the landlord considered using the ASB case review. However, this does not remove the responsibility of the landlord to show it has complied with its policies and legal obligations. We have ordered the landlord to write to the resident explaining the ASB case review have made an award of compensation of £100. This amount is at the lower end of the range of awards within our remedies guidance where we have found a failure that adversely affected a resident.

12. The landlord has a 2-stage complaint process in line with our Complaint Handling Code (“our Code”). It had to respond to complaints at stage 1 within 10 working days of it logging a complaint. It must respond to complaints at stage 2 within 20 working days of it logging it. The landlord also needed to acknowledge complaints at both stages of its complaint process within 5 working days. The landlord’s complaint policy refers to residents making escalation requests as soon as possible and usually within 30 days of receipt of a stage 1 response. The landlord has 10 working days to refuse a complaint or escalation request from the day it logged the complaint or request.
13. It took the landlord 14 working days to acknowledge the complaint on 15 May 2023 from when the resident complained (21 April 2023), against a target of 5 working days. It took the landlord 71 working days to respond to the complaint at stage 1 of its complaint process on 23 August 2023 from when it logged the complaint (15 May 2023), against a target of 10 working days.
14. There was a gap of 424 days between the landlord’s stage 1 response on 23 August 2023 and the resident’s escalation (19 October 2024). It was reasonable of the landlord to open a new complaint at stage 1 of its complaint process on 25 October 2024 under these circumstances. This was within 5 working days of it receiving it (19 October 2024).
15. The landlord then went on to provide the resident with its refusal of the complaint in line with the timescale required in its complaint policy. It said it could not accept a complaint about the ASB as it had no legal relationship with the neighbour. This was not one of the acceptable exclusions in our Code for landlords refusing complaints. It also failed to explain why it was no longer appropriate for it to consider it under its complaints process when it addressed the complaint through this process previously.
16. This amounted to maladministration. The delays and refusal likely caused the resident distress and inconvenience. We have awarded compensation of £100 to acknowledge this which is in line with our remedies guidance. This allows for payments of this amount where there has been failure which the landlord did not acknowledge in its complaint handling, and which likely had an adverse effect.

Learning

17. Landlords should demonstrate in ASB cases that even when the alleged perpetrator is a non-tenant that it fulfils its own responsibilities and considers what actions it should take. The landlord’s interaction with the police and council can inform its own response to ASB. In this complaint the landlord took several appropriate steps to address the ASB. However, landlords must fully consider what action its policies allow it to take independent of the council or police. It is also important for landlords to keep accurate records of all reports of ASB as an audit trail and to effectively manage cases. Landlords should consider the provisions of our Code before refusing complaints from residents.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

18. The landlord records did not show when the resident first reported ASB in 2023, however overall the landlord’s records were satisfactory.

Communication

19. The landlord showed it appropriately requested information from the resident to allow it to investigate the reports of ASB. However, it failed to communicate the reason for its change of position when it refused to consider the resident’s complaint having accepted a similar complaint in the previous year.