Islington Council (202232238)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202232238

Islington Council

10 May 2024

 

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:
    1. The resident’s reports of neighbours incorrectly disposing of waste.
    2. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is a leaseholder. The property is a 1-bedroom flat on the second floor of a low rise block.
  2. The resident has reported residents from neighbouring properties using the communal bins for her building as far back as 2018. The resident made a new report on 7 March 2021, advising that houses opposite to her block were disposing of waste in her communal bins. She said this was causing them to overflow and attract pests. The resident asked the landlord if it could provide refuse bins for these houses, if the landlord could space out bin collection days further and that any perpetrators be contacted and informed that they should not be using these bins. The landlord and resident had various conversations about this matter throughout the early part of 2021, with the resident continuing to report breaches by neighbours.
  3. The resident raised a complaint with the landlord about this issue on 25 May 2021. She was unhappy with the lack of action taken by the landlord following her reports of neighbours disposing of rubbish in the communal bins. She said she had e-mailed the landlord about this and received no response. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 16 June 2021. It said it had now arranged for a communal bin to be provided to the houses opposite, as well as writing to these properties telling them not to use the block’s communal bins. It also sent warning letters to specific properties which had been identified as repeat offenders. It upheld the resident’s complaint, apologising for its failure to respond to some of the reports raised. Moving forward, it told the resident she should report any new breached to its antisocial behaviour team who would monitor the situation.
  4. The resident contacted the landlord on 22 June 2021 to discuss the ongoing situation about providing her neighbours with new bins, as well as clarifying that her complaint was about the lack of response from the tenancy team who she had been making reports to. The resident continued to chase the landlord for updates, including through her local councillor. The resident asked that her complaint be escalated to stage 2 of the complaints process on 17 November 2022 as she had not seen any improvement in the situation, or that the landlord had followed up on its previous commitments.
  5. The landlord reviewed its stage 1 complaint on 2 December 2021. It said it did not consider the e-mail on 22 June 2021 as an escalation request. The landlord said it had rightly upheld the stage 1 complaint and advised that the members of staff responsible for managing the situation would be in touch. Following this, the landlord undertook a visit to the estate to assess the situation and corresponded with the resident about how it intended to manage the situation.
  6. The resident requested an escalation of her complaint to stage 2 of the complaints process on 11 February 2022 as there was no evidence that the actions the landlord said it would undertake had been followed through on. These included providing individual bins for neighbouring properties or that the perpetrators had been told to use the new communal bins. The landlord was delayed in responding to this request, eventually providing its stage 2 complaint response on 23 February 2023. It awarded the resident £100 compensation for its delay in responding. It said that it had now purchased a second communal bin for the houses opposite. It also confirmed that it had been unable to buy individual bins for individual houses due to a lack of budget. It said that whilst this would have been an ideal outcome, it was unfeasible. It added that it had written to all neighbours about the correct bins to use, including sending individual letters to the specific neighbours the resident had identified.
  7. The resident contacted the Ombudsman on 16 March 2023, asking us to consider her complaint. She said that she had been through the landlord’s complaint process but the issue remained unresolved. She said the neighbours’ usage of the communal bins was causing mess and attracting pests. The resident said to resolve her complaint, she would like the houses who were using the bins to be provided with their own bins or a communal bin.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of reports of neighbours incorrectly disposing of waste

  1. At present, the resident’s block has rubbish collections for its external bins twice each week; there are 5 bins in the block. There are also 2 overflow bins for the houses opposite the resident’s block. These overflow bins are placed at the end of the street, meaning that for some of the resident’s neighbours, the blocks external bins are closer to them.
  2. The resident is unhappy that her neighbours who live further away from the overflow bins continue to use her block’s bins, rather than the overflow bins. To resolve the issue, the resident has said that she would like these neighbours to be provided with their own bins, either personally or communally.
  3. The resident also mentioned that she believes the excess rubbish attracts pests, causing a potential health hazard. The landlord’s caretaker reports show that the estate is inspected each month, and these have not detailed any pests. There has also been no evidence provided to suggest that the landlord is aware of any pest control problems caused by the additional rubbish being added to the bins. The landlord also undertook several visits to the estate to discuss the matter with the resident and to investigate her concerns. These actions indicate that the landlord’s actions did not cause a pest problem and that it appropriately considered the resident’s reports.
  4. The landlord has contacted the neighbours, both as a whole and individually. It did so via written communication, and also told the resident that it had spoken directly with specific perpetrators. It has informed them of the correct location for disposing of their waste and told them they should not be using the block’s bins for waste disposal. This was a reasonable attempt on the part of the landlord to educate neighbours on the expected use of bins in the area.
  5. The landlord also purchased the two overflow bins for the houses after the resident had requested it to do so. The resident mentioned that this had stopped some of the houses from using her bins. The landlord also investigated the potential of purchasing additional bins, both individual and communal. It has said that it was unable to purchase these due to budget constraints. It was fair from the landlord to investigate the possibility of providing additional bins and did so when it was able to. The landlord cannot be held at fault if its budget is not able to cover these costs in this instance. The landlord also undertook additional steps such as investigating its caretaker’s stock to see if bins could be sourced from elsewhere. It was unable to source any additional bins.
  6. The resident sought to have the collection days for the bins altered. The resident wanted the landlord to change the days from Mondays and Thursdays to Tuesdays and Fridays. She felt that this would reduce the build-up of rubbish over the weekends. The landlord listened to the resident and worked with its contractors to arrange this. It is unclear if this arrangement remained in place, or if this was moved back due to concerns from the contractors. The landlord’s actions in trying to help the resident by adjusting its processes represented good practice and indicated it took a resolution-focused approach.
  7. Nevertheless, in dealing with the resident’s reports, the landlord often failed to respond to her in a timely manner. This left the resident often out-of-the-loop in regards to what actions the landlord would be taking. For example, when the landlord learnt it would be unable to purchase the bins the resident sought, she continued to chase this information as it had failed to respond to earlier e-mails. This happened on numerous occasions where the resident had to send multiple e-mails before receiving a response. The landlord acknowledged this failing in its stage 1 complaint response but did not seek to provide the resident with suitable redress for the distress and inconvenience that caused. This represented service failure from the landlord.
  8. The landlord should therefore pay the resident £100 compensation for its failure to communicate fairly with the resident. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance which recommends amounts in this range for a failure which adversely affected the resident.
  9. The landlord should also write to the resident informing her as to how to report any new incidents of rubbish being disposed of in the incorrect location. It should also highlight what actions it will be able to take towards the perpetrators of this action. For example, if it chooses to deal with this through its antisocial behaviour policy, it should provide the resident with a copy of this policy and detail exactly how it intends to deal with new reports through this.
  10. It is also recommended that the landlord continue to explore the possible options of providing the neighbouring residents with either individual bins, or a new communal bin closer to those who continue to use the resident’s bin.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

  1. The landlord’s complaint policy at the time this complaint was made had 2 stages. At stage 1, the landlord said it would provide its response within 21 working days. If a resident remained unhappy with the stage 1 complaint response, they were then able to request a review of this response, which the landlord said it would respond to within a further 10 working days. Stage 2 of the complaints process was known as the Chief Executive stage. At Chief Executive stage, the landlord said it would provide a complaint response within 28 calendar days. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code recommends a 2 stage complaints process with responses expected within 10 working days at stage 1 and 20 working days at stage 2.
  2. The landlord received the resident’s complaint on 25 May 2021, and provided its stage 1 response on 16 June 2021. This was a period of 15 working days. Whilst this was slightly outside the timelines that the Ombudsman specifies in the Code, this response was provided within the timescale specified in the landlord’s complaints policy and it does not appear that the time taken to provide this response caused the resident any additional distress and inconvenience.
  3. However, the landlord missed opportunities to escalate the resident’s complaint. The resident’s June 2021 contact specifically mentioned that she did not feel that the communication failures had been properly investigated in her complaint. The landlord should either have escalated her complaint following this or clarified if she wished to escalate the complaint – either to its review stage or stage 2 of its complaint process. The resident’s contact appeared to note that the complaint was still ongoing, resulting in a confusion about how the landlord was handling the issue. This represented a failure in service from the landlord, obstructing the resident from accessing the complaints process.
  4. The landlord took over a year to provide the resident with its final complaint response. In its response, it recognised this failing and provided the resident with £100 compensation. However, in the Ombudsman’s view, this did not represent a reasonable offer of redress. There were several significant failings when dealing with the resident’s complaint, including lengthy delays in providing complaint responses and unfairly obstructing her ability to proceed through the complaints process. The landlord’s actions represented maladministration.
  5. For these failings, the landlord should provide the resident with £250 compensation as redress. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance which recommends figures in this range for circumstances where a landlord ‘has acknowledged failings and/or made some attempt to put things right but failed to address the detriment to the resident’ but also where ‘the offer was not proportionate to the failings identified by our investigation’.

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 neighbours incorrectly disposing of waste.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. It is ordered that within 4 weeks of the date of this letter, the landlord:
    1. Pay the resident £350 compensation, consisting of:
      1. £100 for failing to communicate fairly with the resident when responding to her reports;
      2. £250 for the failings in its handling of her complaint, inclusive of its previous offer of £100 made in its stage 2 complaint response.
    2. Write to the resident to:
      1. apologise for the failures identified in this report;
      2. outline how to report new waste disposal issues and the actions it can, and will, take in response to any new reports.
    3. Provide evidence to the Ombudsman that it has complied with these orders.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should continue to explore the possibility of providing the relevant neighbours with either their own individual bins, or a new communal bin close to their properties. It should update the resident accordingly.