Notting Hill Genesis (202338131)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202338131

Notting Hill Genesis

3 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 handling of the resident’s reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB), and his associated complaint.

Background

2. The resident’s assured tenancy began in 2019. The property is a flat. The neighbour who is referred to in this report is also a tenant of the landlord. She lives in another of the flats within the same block.
3. From early 2021, the resident made numerous reports about the neighbour’s behaviour. This included, at varying times, reports of homophobic, racial, and antisemitic abuse, and sexual harassment. The neighbour signed an acceptable behaviour contract, and the landlord issued her a notice of seeking possession (NOSP), during the second half of 2022.
4. The resident made further reports, and chased responses, during early 2023. He complained, on 5 April 2023, that the landlord had told him in December 2022 that it would be taking legal action but had not provided an update since.
5. The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response, in May 2023, explained its actions and why it considered the current evidence insufficient to take further legal action beyond the NOSP. It apologised that it had not kept the resident updated. It reiterated previous offers of mediation and committed to support and monitor his concerns.
6. The resident asked that his complaint be escalated on 4 July 2023. He said that the landlord had not adequately investigated his evidence. In September 2023 the landlord apologised that it had not yet sent a stage 2 response and offered £250 compensation for this. It visited and contacted him over the following 2 months. It again apologised for its stage 2 delay, and provided an update of its legal action progress, in early December 2023.
7. The landlord’s stage 2 response, on 4 January 2024, apologised for its lateness and offered a further £450 compensation for this. It also apologised that he had not been kept updated by its housing officer and explained its intentions to address this. It offered £900 compensation for the distress caused to him by its communication failings and the abuse he had experienced. It explained the actions it was exploring, including issuing the neighbour a further NOSP.
8. The landlord issued the neighbour a formal warning the following month. In March 2024 it was advised by its solicitor that it now had sufficient evidence to seek an injunction. It said that, at the resident’s request, it had later paused this while the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) decided upon charges against the neighbour. The solicitor confirmed with the resident, later in 2024, that the neighbour had a restraining order in place. The solicitor further noted his recent reports of noise nuisance by the neighbour, and advised that the landlord had instructed an injunction be sought to abate this.
9. The resident asked the Ombudsman to investigate the landlord’s handling of his reports, as he said he was still experiencing abuse and noise nuisance from the neighbour. He told us that the police were awaiting a further CPS decision regarding restraining order breaches. He said that the landlord was using this as a reason not to take further action, which he believes is emboldening the neighbour.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

10. No evidence had been seen that the landlord has responded to the resident’s recent concerns via its formal complaint procedure. Because of that, these matters have not been considered in this investigation. If the resident has concerns about the landlord’s handling of his current reports, or matters that have occurred since his complaint concluded in January 2024, he could consider making a new complaint to the landlord. He could then return to the Ombudsman and ask us to consider his new complaint.

The landlord’s ASB and complaint handling

11. The evidence shows the landlord’s liaison with the police during early 2023. It further shows the resident reporting distress caused by what he said was the neighbour’s continuing behaviour during this period, and his frustration caused by what the landlord later accepted was its poor communications since the end of 2022.
12. The landlord apologised for this in its stage 1 response, on 5 May 2023. It provided a comprehensive explanation of its current position, and its actions the previous year, which is supported by the evidence seen. It made offers to meet with the resident, and demonstrated more timely communications, until the resident escalated his complaint on 4 July 2023. However, as it again later accepted, its communication with the resident over the following 2 months, was poor, and further added to his distress.
13. The landlord offered a “full and frank apology” for its stage 2 complaint delays, on 3 September 2023. It provided an update about its contacts with the police, arranged a further home visit, and offered £250 compensation. Nonetheless, it was a further 4 months before it sent the resident its stage 2 response, which it accepted was “substantially late”. Its further offer of £450 took its total compensation for the impact of its severely delayed complaint handling to £700, which is well within the levels suggested in the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, even for such significant delays.
14. The landlord maintained more timely contact with the resident during late 2023. It explained its progress towards, and the complexities of taking legal action. It acknowledged “that this has taken a considerable amount of time to process”. The resident expressed his frustration with the lack of updates from his housing officer and chased his outstanding complaint.
15. The landlord’s stage 2 response, on 4 January 2024, accepted that alack of communication between its legal team and housing officer had meant it had failed to keep the resident appropriately informed. It apologised and stated the steps it was taking to address this, and provided an update of the current legal position. Its response was empathetic and acknowledged that “the entire experience must be traumatic for yourself”. Its offer of £900 compensation for this and its communication failings was again in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance.
16. The landlord issued the neighbour a formal warning, and received legal advice confirming it could seek an injunction, over the following weeks.
17. Overall, the landlord readily accepted and apologised for both its severely delayed complaint handling, and its failures to keep the resident updated of the actions it was taking. It took reasonable steps to acknowledge and put right those failings. It offered compensation that recognised the resident’s significant distress and was in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance.

Determination

18. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the resident prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves his complaint.

Recommendation

19. Within 4 weeks the landlord should pay the resident any part of its total £1600 compensation that it has not already done so.