Midland Heart Limited (202322841)

Background

1. In September 2023 the resident signed a tenancy with the landlord for a 1 bedroom flat in a block. The resident, who has a mental health condition, lived in the property with her partner. At the time the tenancy was signed, the landlord was in the process of taking legal action to gain possession of the neighbouring property due to anti-social behaviour (ASB). However, the landlord did not inform the resident about the ASB or the legal action prior to her signing the tenancy.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s:
   1. Response to ASB from the resident’s neighbour.
   2. Handling of the formal complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found the landlord has offered reasonable redress in relation to its:
   1. Response to the ASB from the resident’s neighbour.
   2. Handling of the formal complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

The response to the ASB from the resident’s neighbour

4. The landlord acknowledged it failed to inform the resident of ASB from the neighbour before she signed the tenancy. In recognition of this, landlord assisted the resident with a move to another property and offered her compensation which satisfactorily resolved the complaint.

The handling of the formal complaint

5. There were delays in the landlord’s responses to the complaint at both stages of the complaints process. The landlord acknowledged it had taken too long to respond and offered compensation which recognised the issues in its complaint handling.

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.

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

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. While there is no legal obligation to do so, we would expect landlords to provide residents with sufficient information about a property during the viewing and sign-up process to enable them to make an informed decision.
7. The landlord acknowledged that it should have informed the resident about the neighbour’s ASB and the legal action it was taking prior to the resident signing the tenancy. The landlord offered the resident an apology and this was appropriate as the landlord’s omission had a negative impact on the resident’s overall experience in her new home.
8. The evidence demonstrates the landlord acted in line with its ASB policy on receipt of the resident’s reports of the ASB from September 2023 onwards. The landlord completed a risk assessment and sent the resident an action plan. It also added the evidence it received from the resident to the legal case it was pursuing against the neighbour. This was appropriate given it was already in the enforcement stage and seeking possession of the neighbour’s property. In addition, following its assessment of the ASB case, the landlord agreed to assist the resident with a move to another property.
9. The evidence demonstrates the landlord made reasonable efforts to try and rehouse the resident. As well as searching for available properties within its own stock, the landlord also contacted the local authority for assistance with finding available properties for the resident.
10. During the course of its search for available properties the landlord advised the resident to seek a move through a mutual exchange. The landlord’s stage 2 response recognised the suggestion of a mutual exchange was not appropriate. The resident was in need of an urgent transfer and the landlord was still in pursuit of legal action against the neighbour. Therefore, a mutual exchange would not be suitable in the circumstances and would potentially put another resident in the same position as the resident.
11. When a failure is identified, as in this case, our role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this, the Ombudsman takes into account whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: Be Fair, Put Things Right and Learn from Outcomes as well as our own guidance on remedies.
12. The landlord confirmed it would assist the resident with a move to another property. While it was doing so, it agreed to continue to update the resident on the legal case it was pursuing against the neighbour. The evidence demonstrates it did so. In recognition of the impact of its failure to notify the resident of the ASB before her tenancy began and the inappropriate advice it provided the resident to pursue a mutual exchange, the landlord offered the resident £1,500 compensation.
13. We have considered the remedies offered and found the amount of compensation to be proportionate to the level of the landlord’s failings. The compensation fairly reflects the significant impact on the resident caused by the landlord’s failure to disclose the neighbour’s ASB prior to the tenancy being signed, and the inappropriate advice the landlord gave to the resident about a mutual exchange.
14. In addition to the compensation, the landlord committed to assisting the resident with a move to another property. This would enable the resident to live without the ongoing concern of ASB from the neighbour while the landlord continued legal action to gain possession of the neighbour’s property. The evidence confirms that the landlord fulfilled its commitment and assisted the resident with a move to another property in June 2024. The landlord arranged the removal of the resident’s belongings and covered the cost of the carpet installation in her new home.
15. Taking all of the above into account, we are satisfied that the landlord acknowledged its failings, took appropriate steps to put things right, and offered compensation which satisfactorily resolved the complaint.

16. The landlord acknowledged delays in responding to the complaint at both stages of its complaints process, which fell outside the timeframes set out in its policy and Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code).
17. The landlord offered £1,500 compensation in total, which it confirmed took into account its complaint handling failures. Although the landlord did not specify how much of this amount relates specifically to complaint handling, we consider the total compensation to fairly reflect the impact of both the failures in the landlord’s handling of the substantive complaint matter and the delay in its complaint handling.

Learning

18. The landlord acknowledged it should have disclosed the existence of ASB prior to the resident signing the tenancy agreement. It confirmed that it had shared these findings with senior management to prompt a review of its processes in similar cases.
19. The landlord recognised delays in logging the resident’s complaint and stated that it had fed this back internally to support further staff training on its complaints process.
20. The landlord also considered the resident’s concerns about how her reports were handled and shared her feedback to inform additional staff training on understanding the impact of hate crime and supporting residents with vulnerabilities.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

21. The landlord demonstrated detailed record keeping in relation to the resident’s reports of ASB.

Communication

22. While the landlord was not transparent about the existence of ASB prior to the resident signing the tenancy, the evidence shows that its communication with the resident regarding the ASB case was consistent following her reports. It also addressed its poor communication within its responses.