Incommunities Limited (202339712)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202339712

Incommunities Limited

9 October 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. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to antisocial behaviour (ASB), reports, and the resident’s subsequent request to move property.

Background

2. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, whose tenancy at the property began on 13 October 2008. The property is a 3-bedroom house. The resident’s adult son lives at the property with her and acted as her representative in communicating with the landlord and later bringing the complaint to this Service. For the purpose of this report, both residents will be referred to as ‘the resident’.
3. In June 2023, we investigated the resident’s previous ASB complaint in relation to her neighbour. We acknowledged that the landlord was limited in the actions it could take due to a lack of evidence. We found maladministration due to its failure to conduct a timely risk assessment. We ordered the landlord to apologise, pay compensation, and undertake ASB training for staff. We also recommended that it consider rehousing the resident.
4. The resident continued reporting ASB involving her neighbour and their guests. She reported threatening behaviour, inappropriate language and hand gestures resembling a gun. The landlord repeatedly offered to meet with the resident to discuss these issues and her need to be relocated, but the resident preferred not to meet with the landlord in person.
5. The resident raised her formal complaint on 22 October 2023. She said that, following the Service’s previous decision, she had been expecting the ASB situation to improve; however, the landlord took no action to address the ASB or to relocate the residents to alternative accommodations. She also said it took the landlord nine weeks to investigate her report of ASB and seven weeks to carry out its risk assessment. The resident said that, meanwhile, the ASB against her worsened, with a large stone being thrown at her front door in September 2023, following the landlord’s interview with the neighbour. She also said that the landlord’s letter of rehousing contained inconsiderate language, which did not take the circumstances of the case into account.
6. In its 10 January 2024 final response letter, the landlord accepted that there were delays in recording the resident’s reports of ASB in June 2023, and in carrying out a timely risk assessment following further reports in July 2023. It apologised and offered the resident £200 in compensation. It also said that while it could have chosen better language in its rehousing letter, the content of the letter was correct.
7. The resident informed the Service in May 2024 that she had been let down by the landlord’s staff, who had not shown the “slightest interest in her situation”. To resolve the complaint, the resident requested suitable rehousing and compensation to reflect the level of distress suffered.

Assessment and findings

8. The landlord’s ASB policy says it will respond to reports of ASB within 5 working days. It will investigate the complaint within 15 working days; thereafter, it will take action on the complaint within 5 working days. It will review its ASB cases at least every 15 working days, during which it will contact the complainant.
9. On 27 July 2023, the resident reported ASB from her neighbour, which she said had taken place on 21 July and 22 July 2023. Against a target response time of 5 working days, the landlord responded 3 working days later on 1 August 2023. It offered to meet in person to interview the resident about the ASB, which was the first step in its policy. However, the resident did not wish to meet the landlord in person. In response, the landlord posted the relevant form to the resident on 2 August 2023. This was reasonable and within the timeframe set in its policy.
10. The resident contacted the landlord for an update on 1 September 2023, saying she had posted the form back to the landlord. In later correspondence, he said that it was not appropriate for the landlord to wait for her to request an update, as she believed the landlord should have contacted her sooner. There is no evidence that the landlord received the posted form, nor that it had any indication that the resident had returned the completed form.  In the Service’s opinion, it was not unreasonable for the resident to have contacted the landlord for an update.
11. On 7 September 2023, the landlord confirmed it had updated the resident’s ASB case. In line with its ASB policy, it should have now completed its investigation within 15 working days and informed the resident of the outcome within a further 5 working days, meaning a total of 20 working days for this stage of its ASB policy. The landlord interviewed the neighbour on 13 September 2023. It informed the resident of the outcome on 9 October 2023, a total of 23 working days, which was a delay of 3 working days.
12. The neighbour made counter-allegations against the resident. The landlord asked the resident to provide evidence, such as a phone recording, to enable it to take action. Due to the lack of evidence, the landlord was limited in any action it could take. In cases where there are counter-allegations and conflicting versions of events, and in the absence of any evidence beyond hearsay, it would be inappropriate for the landlord to favour one party’s version of events over another’s or to pursue enforcement action against one party but not the other. Because of the limited evidence available, the delay of 3 working days discussed above was unlikely to cause significant detriment to the resident.
13. In its final response letter, the landlord apologised for the delay. It also acknowledged that it had failed to conduct a risk assessment upon opening the ASB case, which was eventually completed on 18 September 2023. It also recognised its failure to open an ASB case in response to a separate ASB report in June 2023. The landlord offered the resident £200 in compensation, which was reasonable, fair, and proportionate compensation.
14. Following our previous report, the landlord wrote to the resident on 7 September 2023 and confirmed that the resident had been accepted onto its management move program. The landlord appropriately managed the resident’s expectation in terms of sourcing a suitable property, and it also explained that her son would be affected by the move, and it invited him to engage in the process of sourcing alternative accommodation for him too. It was reasonable that the landlord set out the terms of its policy to avoid confusion at a later date.
15. Overall, the landlord identified shortcomings in its handling of the ASB. It apologised and offered compensation. It outlined the steps it had already taken and would take to learn from the complaint. These were all appropriate steps to take, which resolved the resident’s complaint reasonably.

Determination

16. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation, which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint about the landlord’s response to ASB reports and the resident’s subsequent request to move property satisfactorily.

Recommendation

17. If it has not already done so, the landlord should pay the resident the £200 offered through its internal complaint process. Our assessment of reasonable redress is based on the landlord doing so.