Islington Council (202323409)
REPORT
COMPLAINT 202323409
Islington Council
20 August 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
- The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
- Reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB).
- The associated complaint.
Background
- The resident is a secure tenant. The property is a 3– bedroom house. She has lived there with her daughter and 2 sons since 2014. Her children have learning difficulties. Her daughter is autistic. The landlord was aware of the vulnerabilities in the household.
- In March 2023 the resident began reporting incidents of racist abuse, threats of violence, and loud music from her neighbour (neighbour A) to the landlord and police. In her initial reports she asked to remain anonymous.
- The landlord sent appointment letters to interview neighbour A. Neighbour A did not attend the appointments. The landlord worked with other agencies regarding concerns raised about neighbour A. It kept the resident informed about the actions it was taking. Whilst the investigations were ongoing the resident continued to report further incidents.
- The resident continued to report incidents of racist verbal abuse and noise nuisance to the landlord throughout April 2023. She sent recordings of the ASB to the landlord. She sought help from family support services who wrote to the landlord on her behalf between 11 and 26 April 2023. The family support service highlighted the vulnerabilities in the resident’s household. They reported that the resident’s daughter had been repeating the racist language being used and they were concerned about the further detriment these issues had.
- The landlord sought legal advice regarding neighbour A’s behaviour on 17 April 2023. It referred the incidents to its Community Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conference (CMARAC) on the same day. It provided details of its out of hours ASB service to the resident.
- The resident reported banging on the walls, racist abuse, and threats to kill from neighbour A to the landlord on 24 April 2023.
- The landlord issued neighbour A with a breach of tenancy warning, followed by a Notice of Seeking Possession in April 2023.
- The landlord’s case notes show that it discussed the incidents with the resident on 25 April 2023. It asked her if she required emergency temporary accommodation, which she refused because of the impact this would have on her daughter.
- The landlord’s internal notes show that it collaborated with the police and health services on 25 April 2023. Neighbour A was moved from the property temporarily. It referred the resident to its victim support service on 27 April 2023.
- While the neighbour was away from their home in May 2023, one of their family members stayed at the property. On 4 May 2023 the resident reported issues with the family member having loud parties and behaving inappropriately. The landlord sent a warning letter to the occupant staying at the neighbour’s address on 9 May 2023.
- On 17 May 2023 the resident sent recordings of loud music to the landlord. She described music being played “for hours and hours” throughout the day and night. The landlord replied to the resident on 23 May 2023. It said that it had listened to the recordings but needed clarity regarding the times the incidents occurred. It directed the resident to a noise application she could download, but she said it did not work on her phone. It had sent out witness appeal letters to other neighbours but there were no complaints made by other residents since the neighbour left.
- The resident said that she had spoken to her neighbours and told them how to report incidents to the landlord. The records show that other neighbours made similar reports on 23 and 24 May 2023.
- The landlord met with the resident on 31 May 2023. It discussed an incident that had occurred on 23 May 2023 where the resident and neighbour A had argued in the garden, followed by offensive music being played and further racist abuse. The landlord recommended that the resident download the ‘Noise App’ to substantiate her reports.
- The resident called the landlord on 15 June 2023. It noted that she was upset and said she was being made to feel unwell because of the ASB. She had heard neighbour A using racist language about her. The landlord arranged to interview neighbour A the same day.
- The resident sought help from her MP, who wrote to the landlord on her behalf on 19 June 2023. The MP highlighted the impact the ASB had on the resident and her family.
- The landlord called the resident on 20 June 2023. She said that neighbour A had continued to abuse her and her family. She said that she was unable to use her garden, fearing confrontation from neighbour A. She was having panic attacks because of the ASB.
- The landlord interviewed neighbour A in June 2023, who denied the allegations of racist abuse and targeting the resident’s daughter. They admitted to screaming and shouting. Neighbour A asked the landlord to pass on their apology for their behaviour in April 2023. Neighbour A agreed not to play music at a volume that could be considered ASB.
- The resident was unhappy with the landlord’s response and felt that the landlord should have evicted neighbour A. The landlord set out a chronology of events in an email to the resident on 28 June 2023. It said that the recent allegations made were not substantiated as the videos were inconclusive. It recommended that the resident consider mediation with neighbour A.
- The resident disagreed with the landlord’s chronology on 29 June 2023. She said that there had been incidents in May and June that had been overlooked. She was unhappy with the suggestion that she mediate with neighbour A. She asked the landlord to clarify its plan to resolve the ASB. She sent a further email asking for an update to this on 6 July 2023.
- The resident complained on 24 July 2023. She said that the landlord had not acted on her reports of racist abuse, verbal abuse, and threats of violence from neighbour A. She wanted the landlord to evict neighbour A. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 26 July 2023.
- The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 9 August 2023. It did not uphold the complaint as it had responded to reports and appropriate action was taken. It set out the actions taken to resolve the ASB and the work it had done with other agencies to reduce the impact on the resident. It said:
- It was not taking any further action against neighbour A that would result in eviction.
- The case remained open for investigation.
- The resident had the ‘Noise App’ for reporting new incidents.
- It acknowledged the impact the issues had on the resident.
- The resident asked for her complaint to be escalated to stage 2 on 4 September 2023. She said:
- She had not received the stage 1 response.
- The landlord had not effectively addressed the ASB, which was persistent and serious.
- She was unable to relax or enjoy her home.
- The last incident in May 2023 included threats to kill and racist abuse.
- The landlord acknowledged the resident’s concerns that she had not received her stage 1 response the same day.
- The resident made a further request to escalate her complaint on 11 September 2023. She broadly reiterated the same points and included a history of incidents reported between 15 and 26 June 2023. The landlord acknowledged the request on 14 September 2023.
- The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 6 October 2023. It summarised a chronology of events and actions taken by the landlord. It said:
- Although the ASB that occurred was very disturbing, there was no evidence to uphold the complaint about how it was managed.
- Harassment and/or racism are considered a breach of its tenancy conditions and are unacceptable. When investigating reports of ASB, including reports of racism and harassment, it was required to follow policies and procedures. Although neighbour A may have been abusive, it must consider the circumstances and ensure that all parties are treated fairly and impartially. It had a duty of care towards the resident, her family, and the neighbour. It offered appropriate support to both parties.
- It set out its procedures to respond to ASB.
- It took appropriate action to resolve the ASB. This included warnings issued to neighbour A regarding ASB, a referral to the CMARAC, and referring the resident to victim support services.
- There was no documented action plan, or diary sheets for the resident to record ASB. However, it was advised that the resident’s preferred method of contact for reporting ASB was by email and this was used. It was in regular contact with the resident by email and over the telephone from March to July 2023. An action plan would have added clarity and structure to the case management process. It reminded the service of the expectation to produce an action plan as part of the process.
- It was satisfied that the action taken in response to the resident’s reports of ASB were appropriate and in accordance with its policy. It was satisfied that due regard was given to the resident and her family’s welfare.
- The resident reported incidents of noise nuisance and verbal abuse in November 2023. The landlord interviewed neighbour A, who denied the allegations. The resident was encouraged to provide further evidence by the ‘Noise App’.
- The resident remained unhappy with the landlord’s response and sought help from the Ombudsman in November 2023. The resident told the Ombudsman she stopped using her garden shortly afterwards and no new reports were made to the landlord until May 2024.
Assessment and findings
Scope of investigation
- The resident has reported that there has been a recurrence of incidents of ASB from May 2024. In the interest of fairness, the scope of this investigation is limited to the issues raised during the resident’s formal complaint. We have considered the resident’s reports of ASB from March 2023 to November 2023 This is because the landlord needs to be given a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to any reported dissatisfaction with its actions prior to the involvement of this Service. Any new issues that have not been subject to a formal complaint can be addressed directly with the landlord and progressed as a new formal complaint if required.
- The resident has expressed that her desired outcome would be the eviction of her neighbour. The Ombudsman is unable to propose a remedy that would put matters right for the resident but would adversely affect other individuals. We will consider whether another remedy is appropriate.
Policy and procedures
- The landlord’s ASB policy says that where a hate crime has been committed it will respond to reports urgently. It will:
- Conduct a risk assessment.
- Report the incident to police or other agencies responsible for safeguarding.
- Refer the resident to supportive services.
- Consider available legal remedies/enforcement action.
- Ensure it has had due regard to any equality considerations.
- Provide reporters with a clear plan for addressing the issue including timescales for action, within 10 working days of the initial report.
Reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB).
- ASB case management is a crucial aspect of a landlord’s service delivery. Effective use of an ASB procedure enables the landlord to identify appropriate steps to resolve potential areas of conflict and improve the experience of its residents. ASB cases are often challenging as options available or chosen by a landlord to resolve a case may not be the resident’s preferred outcome. It can become difficult to manage expectations.
- In cases relating to ASB, it is not the Ombudsman’s role to determine whether ASB occurred or who is responsible. The Ombudsman can assess how a landlord has dealt with reports it has received in the timeframe of a complaint. We can assess whether the landlord has followed proper procedure, good practice, and behaved reasonably, taking account of all the circumstances of the case.
- The evidence shows that the landlord’s initial response reflected the seriousness of the allegations made by the resident. It conducted a risk assessment and referred the resident to its victim support service. It treated the incidents as hate crime and provided urgent responses in line with its policy and procedures.
- The landlord had due regard to its Public Sector Equalities Duty and involved other agencies responsible for safeguarding. It sought to address the causes of the ASB, whilst considering other legal remedies to resolve the situation. Its referrals to police, social services and CMARAC were not done in isolation. Its initial response to interview the neighbour was appropriate and in accordance with its policy and procedures. When the resident made further reports of serious ASB, the landlord acted accordingly. It continued to issue warnings and seek to interview the neighbour and their family members. It was appropriate to issue warnings to the neighbour. Its decision to issue a Notice of Seeking Possession in April 2024 reflected the severity of the reports.
- When the landlord replied to the resident on 23 May 2023 it was unfair to say that there had been no reports made by other neighbours. She had spoken to her neighbours who told her reports had been made, which was reflected in the landlord’s evidence. Although the landlord set out how it was seeking evidence from other neighbours, it should have ensured that its response was accurate. The resident said that the response made her feel that the landlord dismissed her reports.
- The number of incidents reduced following the landlord’s interview with the neighbour on 22 June 2023. It was reasonable for the landlord to ask the resident to report new incidents. It was appropriate to clearly set out that the additional evidence provided was inconclusive and that it would continue monitoring the case.
- Throughout the timeline the resident highlighted the severity of the impact the ASB had on both her and her family. It is clear from the records that the ASB was serious and caused harm to the resident and her family. She repeatedly said that it caused her to feel unwell and her young daughter had started using the foul and racist language used by neighbour A. ASB of this nature can have lasting effects on the resident, which was evident in her statements about staying inside and no longer having full enjoyment of her home.
- The records show that the landlord recognised the seriousness early in the timeline and took reasonable action in response. It made referrals to support agencies who could help to mitigate the impact on the resident/her family. It presented the case to its CMARAC to ensure that action taken by it and other professionals was coordinated. Its offer to provide emergency temporary accommodation in April 2024 was reasonable. It sought to ensure that appropriate protective measures were put in place during March-June 2023.
- However, there was no evidence available to the Ombudsman that it reviewed the CMARAC after the reduction of incidents in June 2023. In its stage 2 response it recognised that there was no action plan from the outset. Had there been, it could have used this to monitor the case and set up a reasonable communication plan with the resident. The action plan can be an effective tool to manage ASB for both the landlord and the resident. Once it had identified this oversight the landlord should have met with the resident to set up a new plan. This would have allowed it to be clear on how the resident could report new incident and what it would do if the ASB persisted.
- The Ombudsman finds no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of ASB. The landlord could have been more proactive in its approach to evidence gathering and reducing the impact on the resident. However, its actions were conducted in accordance with its policy and procedures. Its response from the outset showed that it recognised the severity of the reports made by the resident. Its offers of support and temporary accommodation were appropriate in the circumstances. It issued appropriate warnings when the neighbour’s behaviour continued.
The associated complaint.
- The landlord’s policy states that an expression of dissatisfaction, however made, about the standard of service, actions, or lack of action by the landlord will be recorded as a complaint. It is important for the landlord to ensure that it maintains its complaint handling commitments, and that it complies with the timeframes set out in its policy.
- The evidence shows the landlord’s complaint responses were issued broadly in accordance with the timescales set out in its policy and procedures. It issued its stage 1 response within 10 working days. The resident said that she did not receive her stage 1 response when she made her stage 2 complaint on 4 September 2023. The evidence available to the Ombudsman shows an email was sent with the stage 1 response attached on 9 August 2023.
- The landlord did not consider the resident’s email on 4 September 2023 to be a request to escalate the complaint. It acknowledged her email and sought to resolve the issues expressed with the lack of a stage 1 response. It should have considered this to be a request to escalate the complaint to stage 2. It did not and the resident had to make a further request on 11 September 2023. The landlord acknowledged this on 14 September 2023. Its response on 6 October 2023 was issued within 20 working days of its acknowledgement and considered the escalation from 11 September 2023. It did not address the resident’s earlier requests. This failure to recognise the initial escalation request caused the resident some additional time and trouble in pursuing her complaint.
- The landlord’s stage 2 response was comprehensive. It showed that it had a good understanding of the resident’s complaint. It recognised the impact the substantive issues had on the resident. It was fair in its summary of events.
- When determining the outcome of this investigation, the Ombudsman has considered the detriment the failure to recognise the initial escalation request caused the resident. Overall, the Ombudsman finds service failure in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint. Its complaint responses were comprehensive. It broadly complied with the Ombudsman’s dispute resolution principles. However, it did not recognise the resident’s expression of dissatisfaction on 4 September 2023 to escalate her complaint. This caused the resident additional time and trouble to raise the same issues on 11 September 2023. The landlord should pay the resident £50 for her time and trouble.
Determination
- In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was:
- No maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of ASB.
- Service failure in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.
Orders
- Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
- Pay the resident compensation of £50 for its complaint handling failures.
- Provide evidence of compliance with the above to the Ombudsman.
Recommendations
- The landlord should meet with the resident to discuss the new incidents of ASB. It should seek to resolve the issues preventing her from using the garden. It should include an action plan on how to report new incidents and action that will be taken in response.