From 13 January 2026, we will no longer accept new case enquiries by email. Please use our online complaint form to bring a complaint to us. This helps us respond to you more quickly.

Need help? Other ways to contact us.

Nottingham Community Housing Association Limited (202116575)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202116575

Nottingham Community Housing Association Limited

1 August 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:
    1. the resident’s report of repairs to disabled adaptations in the property.
    2. the resident’s reports of Antisocial Behaviour (ASB).
  2. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident has been an assured tenant of the landlord since March 2016. The landlord is a Housing Association. The property is a 2-bedroom bungalow. The resident lives on her own. The resident is a wheelchair user and has mental health issues recorded on the landlord’s systems. Her son acts as his mother’s representative. For this report we will refer to both as ‘the resident.’
  2. The resident called us on 21 October 2021 with concerns about the handling of the disabled adaptations by the landlord and ASB. We wrote to the landlord on 22 October 2021 to raise these issues on her behalf. The landlord initially treated the issues as a service request.
  3. After the resident contacted us again, on 26 August 2022 we asked the landlord to provide a stage 1 response. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 9 September 2022. It told the resident that the Occupational Therapist at the Local Authority was looking into funding. This was through a Disabilities Facilities Grant (DFG) for the disabled adaptations. The landlord referred to a conversation with the resident about ASB on 31 August 2022.
  4. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord response. She told us the matter was raised to stage 2 on 9 September 2022. The landlord did not agree. Following several telephone calls, emails, and letters we asked the landlord to provide a stage 2 response by 29 June 2023.
  5. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 20 June 2023. The complaint was not upheld. The landlord said there was no contact from the resident. But on 30 June 2023, the resident told us that they had tried to contact the landlord several times, and the mobile number either rang out or there was no answer. On 1 December 2023, we sent a letter to the landlord for it to provide a final response to the complaint by 8 December 2023.
  6. The landlord sent its stage 2 to the resident on 7 December 2023. It said that the disability adaptations were not in its control. The landlord also stated it would discuss the ASB issues at a home visit, about rehousing, but the resident cancelled the visit. The landlord said it did not have any ASB cases for the resident since July 2020.
  7. On 14 December 2023, the resident stated they wished the Ombudsman to consider the issues raised as they remained dissatisfied following the landlord’s stage 2 response.

Assessment and findings

Jurisdiction

  1. What the Ombudsman can and cannot investigate is called our jurisdiction and is set out in the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. Paragraph 42.j. of the Scheme says we may not consider complaints which fall properly within the jurisdiction of another Ombudsman, regulator or complaint-handling body.
  2. The resident complained to the landlord that she required adaptations to her home. The landlord explained that these adaptations required funding through the Local Authorities DFG. The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO) can review complaints about applications for a DFG.
  3. Therefore, the complaint about reports of adaptations to the property are outside of our jurisdiction.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of Antisocial Behaviour (ASB)

  1. The landlord was unable to provide the ASB policy in place at the time under investigation. The landlord has previously given us a policy from January 2018 – January 2021 and we have considered this. It also supplied a more recent policy issued May 2022.
  2. In a letter dated 28 October 2021 from the landlord to the resident, it sets outs the resident made a report of ASB on 17 July 2021. The behaviour reported was “children in the area who are kicking balls against your wall, spitting on the driveway and messing with the windows.”  The letter states “you feel you cannot leave the house without there being an issue but do not know who the children are.”
  3. The letter goes on to say that on 28 July 2021 a letter was sent by the landlord “to the residents on the street regarding this, the police have been informed, and a decoy camera has been given to you to prevent ASB happening outside of your home.”  The landlord also states, “We do not have a record of any other issues being reported to us since that date.” The landlord’s actions are reasonable in these circumstances.
  4. Following further contact from the resident, this Service asked the landlord to raise a stage 1 complaint. In its complaint response dated 9 September 2022, it stated that there had been a conversation with the resident on 31 August 2022 and the ASB issue discussed. It also stated the landlord met with the police on 6 July 2022 to walk the area, but this “did not identify any particular issue.”  It is not clear from the evidence if the meeting with police was already arranged or if it was because of further reports from the resident.
  5. There is no evidence to support the landlord acted in line with its more recent policy which states “During the first contact with a complainant the ASB Investigator should explain the investigation process and agree a plan of action with the complainant. This Action Plan will be put into written form and a copy will be provided to the complainant within three working days of its agreement. The Action Plan will explain what NCHA have agreed to do and what the complainant has also agreed to do with respect to the investigation.”
  6. The policy also states “During this initial contact a risk assessment will be completed. The risk assessment will produce a score that will result in the complainant being categorised as at either Standard, Medium or High Risk.”  This was unreasonable as the landlord was aware of the vulnerabilities of the resident, and this was a missed opportunity to resolve the complaint quickly and effectively and reduce the impact on the resident.
  7. In a letter to the landlord on 24 May 2023, we asked for the complaint to move to stage 2. In its complaint response on 7 December 2023, the landlord stated the ASB issues were going to be discussed at a home visit about rehousing. The resident cancelled this visit.
  8. There is no evidence of the landlord taking any further steps relating to ASB. This is not in line with the policies previously mentioned. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to attempt to speak with the resident again to make sure it knew of all incidents of ASB so the resident could be offered support. The landlord knew about the resident’s vulnerabilities and failed to show due regard to its duties set out in the Equality Act 2010.
  9. The stage 2 complaint response also states it did not have any ASB cases for the resident since July 2020. This is contradictory to the letter of 28 October 2021. This is unreasonable. There is no evidence of what was reported, or when, which may cause further impact on the resident.
  10. There is some evidence of steps being taken in relation to the resident’s reports of ASB. In summary the landlord:
    1. Took some steps to try and understand the residents reports of ASB.
    2. Failed to complete a risk assessment.
    3. Failed to agree an action plan to resolve the reports in line with its policy.
    4. Failed to be proactive in its communication with the resident.
  11. A landlord should have systems in place to maintain accurate records of repair reports, responses, investigations, and communications. Good record keeping is vital to evidence the action a landlord has taken, and failure to keep adequate records indicates that the landlord’s processes are not operating effectively. The assessment and findings point towards poor record keeping by the landlord.
  12. We have therefore found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of ASB and have ordered the landlord to pay the resident £150 compensation for the distress and inconvenience. This is in line with our Remedies Guidance published on our website. The landlord has also been ordered to apologise to the resident and arrange a meeting to discuss any current ASB she is experiencing.

The landlord’s complaint handling

  1. The landlord recorded a complaint from the resident on 26 August 2022 following intervention from this Service. The landlord responded to the resident on 9 September 2022 which was reasonable in the circumstances.
  2. The resident told us the complaint was escalated to stage 2 by her social worker. The landlord stated it had not received this request. There is no evidence available from either the landlord or resident to support whether a request had been made to escalate the complaint, or not, to stage 2. It is reasonable for the landlord to explain it had not received the escalation.
  3. On 24 May 2023 we asked the landlord to provide a stage 2 response by 29 June 2023.
  4. On 20 June 2023, the landlord issued a stage 2 response. The complaint was not upheld. The reason was in reference to its policy “3.6.10 During the thorough investigation, if a complainant does not respond to requests for information or fails to co-operate, the Investigating Officer should write to the complainant advising the complaint will be closed within 5 working days and recorded as unwarranted. As you have not made contact …, we are now closing your complaint as not upheld.”
  5. The landlord’s policy states, “Some complainants may need support to register a complaint, and colleagues should provide appropriate assistance or signpost to suitable, non-chargeable advocacy services if required.”  There is no evidence to support the landlord followed its policy when the resident’s vulnerabilities were known.
  6. Following further contact from the resident to this service, on 1 December 2023 we requested the landlord to provide a final complaint response by 8 December 2023.
  7. On 7 December 2023, the landlord responded to the resident with the final complaint outcome, and this was reasonable in the circumstances.
  8. Overall, the landlord had responded on time to requests from us. There is no evidence that the resident raised complaints directly with the landlord however the landlord was not as proactive as it reasonably should have been.
  9. We found service failure in relation to the landlord’s complaint handling in that it that it failed to apply its own policies and /or procedures. We have ordered the landlord to pay the resident £50 compensation for the distress and inconvenience. This is in line with our Remedies Guidance published on our website.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 42.j. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the residents reports of repairs to adaptations in the property are outside of jurisdiction.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration with regards to the landlord’s handling of the ASB reports.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure with regards to the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks the landlord should:
    1. Provide an apology from a Senior Manager to the resident including what steps the landlord is taking to prevent similar failures in the future.
    2. Arrange a meeting to discuss any current ASB the resident is experiencing.
    3. Pay £150 directly to the resident for distress and inconvenience for handling of reports of ASB.
    4. Pay £50directly to the resident for the distress and inconvenience for the handling of the resident’s complaints.
  2. The landlord must provide evidence of compliance with these orders to the Ombudsman within 4 weeks of the date of this decision.

Recommendations

  1. The Ombudsman recommends that the landlord:
    1. Provide refresher training for all complaint handling staff, having a particular focus on identifying ongoing issues that are not resolved at stage 1 of the complaint process.
    2. Review its policies and procedures relating to record-keeping, to make sure all staff are aware of the importance of keeping comprehensive and accurate records. Further information can be found in the Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Knowledge and Information Management (KIM).
    3. Provide refresher training for all relevant staff, focusing on the effective handling of ASB and making sure actions are in line with the relevant ASB policy.