Ongo Homes Limited (202310887)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202310887

Ongo Homes Limited

28 January 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of anti-social behaviour by her neighbour.

Background

The resident is an assured tenant of a housing association. The tenancy of the property that is the subject of this investigation started on 22 November 2019. However, the resident’s tenancy at this property ended in December 2023 as she was transferred to an alternative property owned by the same landlord.
The landlord has advised this Service that it did not have any vulnerabilities recorded for the resident. However, the local council advised the landlord that the resident was rehoused because of the impact of her housing on her health.
The property that is the subject of this investigation is a 2-bedroom, mid-terrace, new-build house.
From December 2019, the resident reported various incidents of anti-social behaviour (ASB) by her neighbours. The resident reported that one of her neighbours was constantly banging and slamming doors, shouting and screaming, parking inconsiderately, being abusive and intimidating and smoking cannabis.
As a result of the resident’s reports of ASB, the landlord opened various cases on its ASB system and contacted the resident and her neighbour on various occasions during December 2019, 2020 and 2021. There was also contact between the resident and the police during this period.
On 5 November 2021, the resident complained to the landlord about the way it had handled her reports of ASB and therefore the landlord registered a stage one complaint.
The landlord sent its stage one reply on 9 December 2021 in which it stated that at the request of the police, the landlord had accompanied the police on 30 September 2021 to visit 2 of the households involved in the incident.
The landlord accepted in its stage one reply that there had been a delay in communicating with the resident regarding the outcome of a joint visit it had carried out with the police. They had visited 2 households involved in an incident affecting the resident. The landlord apologised for failing to keep the resident updated of progress and offered her a goodwill payment of 2 weeks rent (£231.14).
On 1 November 2022, the resident sent a number of videos to the landlord, which she said were evidence of noise nuisance caused by her neighbour. The landlord therefore opened a new case on its system as it had closed the previous one.
From November 2022 to May 2023, the landlord carried out various home visits to both the resident and the neighbour to discuss the resident’s complaints of ASB. The landlord also spoke to both parties by phone and sent various emails. During this period, the resident continued to report ASB, including noise caused by the neighbour slamming doors, playing music loudly and shouting. The resident also reported that the neighbour’s partner allowed his dog out without a lead. The resident filled out several diary sheets and submitted video recordings to the landlord. The neighbour denied causing ASB and made counter-allegations against the resident who she said was harassing her.
The resident made a stage 2 complaint on 22 May 2023 in which she reported that the ASB by her neighbour had been ongoing since September 2021 and consisted of shouting, abuse, intimidation, threats, slamming doors and other noise nuisance.
The landlord sent its stage 2 reply on 21 June 2023 and confirmed that it had closed the previous ASB case in 2021. The landlord stated that as a long period had elapsed since then, it would only investigate the ASB issues over the last 6 months. The landlord outlined the action it had taken to resolve the ASB and concluded that it had followed its policies and had maintained contact with the resident during the 6-month period. Therefore, the landlord did not uphold the resident’s complaint. The landlord said it had written to the resident and advised her to provide further evidence by 28 June 2023 to show that the ASB case should be re-opened.
The resident contacted this Service on 19 July 2023 to say that she wanted to complain about the landlord’s handling of her reports of ASB.
The resident continued to report ASB to the landlord during August 2023 to October 2023. She was rehoused by the local authority in December 2023 into an alternative property owned by the landlord. The resident wrote to this Service on 26 March 2024 to report that she had been verbally abused by her neighbour on the day she moved out of her property (16 December 2023). She also stated that she was now suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and experienced anxiety attacks because of the events at her previous property.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

Although the resident made a stage one complaint on 5 November 2021, she did not make a stage 2 complaint until 22 May 2023. A considerable period had therefore elapsed between the stage one and stage 2 complaints.
The Ombudsman encourages residents to raise complaints with their landlords in a timely manner. This is because with the passage of time, evidence may be unavailable and personnel involved may have left an organisation, which makes it difficult for a thorough investigation to be carried out and for informed decisions to be made. Therefore, taking into account the availability and reliability of evidence, it is considered fair and reasonable for this assessment to focus on the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of ASB from 1 November 2022. Reference to events that occurred prior to this date has been made in this report to provide context.
The resident reported various incidents of ASB to the landlord after its stage 2 reply on 21 June 2023. This included reports that her neighbour had verbally abused her on 16 December 2023, which was the date the resident moved out of the property. A key part of the Ombudsman’s role is to assess the landlord’s response to a complaint and therefore it is important that the landlord has had an opportunity to consider all the information being investigated by the Ombudsman as part of its complaint response. It is therefore considered fair and reasonable to only investigate matters up to the date of the stage 2 reply. Information following the landlord’s final complaint response has, however, been included in this report for context.
The resident advised this Service on 26 March 2024 that she was suffering from PTSD and experienced anxiety attacks because of the events at her previous property. The Ombudsman is unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. This would be better dealt with as a personal injury claim through the courts. The resident may wish to consider taking independent legal advice if she wishes to pursue this option. The Ombudsman has, however, assessed the service the landlord provided and any overall distress or inconvenience this may have caused.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of anti–social behaviour by her neighbour

The landlord’s tenancy conditions state:
1. “You, your family, lodgers, visitors and pets must not cause nuisance, annoyance or disturbance to any other person”.
2. “You, your family, lodgers and visitors must not harass or threaten to harass any other persons who include tenants, other members of your household, our staff and contractors or any other person”.
3. “If you report nuisance or harassment, we will give you help and advice. We will investigate your complaints and decide what action to take. Where there is evidence of harassment or victimisation we will respond”.
The landlord’s Anti-Social Behaviour Policy states:
1. It will start an investigation on priority anti-social behaviour cases, which includes serious noise nuisance, within 5 working days. Investigations on routine cases, such as neighbour disputes, will start within 10 working days.
The landlord’s ASB toolkit states:
1. “In order to proceed with any formal tenancy action this needs to be evidenced as statutory nuisance via Environmental Health. Tenants should be signposted to download diary sheets from the local authority website”.
2. “Once returned the diary sheets can be reviewed to determine any next possible steps. For example, forwarding to the local authority for investigation”.
3. The landlord will ask the person reporting ASB to score the impact it is having on them from 1-10 in order to assess the level of risk.
4. Residents may be asked to report incidents to other agencies, such as the police or the local authority’s Environmental Health team.
5. Residents may be asked to provide evidence of ASB, such as diary sheets, video footage and photographs.
6. The toolkit lists various actions that could be taken to resolve ASB issues, including mediation and good neighbour agreements.
7. The landlord can support a resident to initiate the ‘community trigger’ process.
For clarification, the role of this Service is not to establish whether the ASB reported happened or not. The Ombudsman’s role is to establish whether the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of ASB was in line with its legal and policy obligations and whether its response was fair in all the circumstances of the case.
The resident phoned the landlord on 1 November 2022 to report that her sleep was being disrupted by her neighbour who was making noise, including banging, slamming doors and talking loudly. She mentioned that the neighbour and her friend often stood outside intimidating her. She also mentioned that the neighbour allowed her dog outside without a lead.
During the conversation with the resident on 1 November 2022, the landlord asked her to score the impact of the reported ASB. The resident advised the landlord that the score was 8. The landlord acted appropriately in accordance with its ASB toolkit by asking the resident to score the impact of the ASB as it would help the landlord assess the level of risk.
The landlord phoned the resident on 8 November 2022 to obtain further details about the reported ASB. The landlord agreed that it would send the resident monitoring forms (diary sheets) and would speak to the neighbour about the reported noise. The landlord wrote to the resident with the diary sheets on the same day.
The landlord had therefore acted in accordance with its policy by contacting the resident within 5 working days to begin its investigation. It had provided the resident with diary sheets so that she could document the reported ASB. This was reasonable as it would help the landlord decide whether the neighbour was in breach of her tenancy agreement. The diary sheets would also provide the landlord with evidence should it decide to take more formal action against the neighbour.
The landlord’s records show that it attempted to contact the neighbour to discuss the ASB on 10 and 18 November 2022, which was appropriate as the landlord had agreed this action with the resident on 1 November 2022. However, the landlord was unable to contact the neighbour and therefore escalated the case to its Tenancy Officer. This escalation was reasonable as it was in line with its ASB toolkit.
The landlord maintained regular contact with the resident by ringing her on 22 and 25 November 2022 and carrying out a home visit on 1 December 2022. The resident continued to report that the neighbour was causing ASB by banging doors, shouting, intimidating her and allowing her dog to be off the lead outside. It was appropriate for the landlord to maintain regular contact with the resident while it was investigating the reports of ASB. During this period, the resident submitted the completed diary sheets and video footage to support her reports of ASB.
The landlord emailed and spoke to the neighbour on 8 December 2022 and visited her at home on 14 December 2022. The neighbour denied causing a nuisance but agreed to avoid any future conflict with the resident. The neighbour also said she had spoken to her partner about keeping his dog under control. The landlord asked the neighbour if she would consider mediation but she declined. It was appropriate that the landlord had interviewed the neighbour about the reported ASB as this action had been agreed with the resident. It was also reasonable that the landlord had suggested mediation as this is listed as one of the potential actions in the ASB toolkit.
The landlord carried out home visits to the resident’s property on 14 and 16 December 2022 but she was not at home. Therefore, the landlord emailed her to provide an update regarding the outcome of its interview with the neighbour. This was appropriate as the landlord’s ASB policy states that it will keep in contact with residents who have reported ASB at least once a month to keep them up to date.
The landlord advised the resident that the neighbour had made counter-allegations that she had been banging on the walls. The landlord visited the resident at home on 9 January 2023. The resident confirmed the neighbour’s dog was now being kept on a lead but advised the landlord that the neighbour had created a great deal of noise over the Christmas period.
The landlord agreed to request the council’s Environmental Health team to install noise monitoring equipment. It was reasonable that the landlord had continued to keep in contact with the resident and had provided feedback to the resident about the outcome of its interview with the neighbour. It meant that the resident was being kept updated about the action the landlord was taking. It was also reasonable that the landlord had agreed to ask the Environmental Health team whether they could assist by installing noise monitoring equipment. The landlord’s ASB policy emphasises that the landlord will work in partnership with other agencies, such as local authorities.
On 19 January 2023, the Environmental Health team advised the landlord that the resident would need to register the ASB reports with them directly as this could not be done on her behalf by the landlord. The landlord therefore conveyed this to the resident on the same day. It was appropriate that the landlord had conveyed this information to the landlord in a timely manner so that she could report the ASB to the local authority as soon as possible.
During January to March 2023, the landlord continued to contact the resident and the neighbour. For example, it spoke to the neighbour on 19 January 2023, 21 February 2023, 3 March 2023 and 23 March 2023.Similarly, the landlord spoke to the resident on 31 January 2023, 7 February 2023, 17 March 2023, 23 March 2023, 24 March 2023 and 27 March 2023.The resident continued to report that the neighbour was causing noise and other ASB. The level of contact from the landlord was reasonable and demonstrated that the landlord was attempting to investigate the allegations and counter-allegations made by the resident and her neighbour.
The resident advised the landlord on 23 March 2023 that the Environmental Health team had refused to install noise monitoring equipment in her property. She said the best outcome for her would therefore be to transfer to another property.
During April 2023, the landlord continued to explore with the resident and her neighbour the possibility of mediation. However, the landlord’s records show that both of them declined this option. The landlord therefore said it would look at arranging for the resident and the neighbour to sign a good neighbour agreement. It asked the resident to consider this option. It was reasonable for the landlord to suggest a good neighbour agreement as an alternative to mediation. This was again one of the options listed in the ASB toolkit and would allow both parties to commit to certain behaviours.
The resident advised the landlord on 9 May 2023 that she was unwilling to sign a good neighbour agreement as she believed it would be an admission that she had done something wrong. The landlord discussed the ‘community trigger’ (or ASB case review) with the resident but said it could not apply for this on her behalf. It was reasonable that the landlord had advised the resident about the community trigger, which would enable various stakeholders to meet in order to review her ASB case. It was also reasonable for the landlord to advise the resident that it could not initiate the community trigger on her behalf as the local authority’s website makes it clear that it is for victims of persistent ASB to use the community trigger.
The landlord advised the resident that as she did not want to engage in the good neighbour agreement process, it would be closing her case. The landlord followed this up in writing on 10 May 2023 by confirming it was closing the resident’s ASB case. The landlord included a link for the resident to start the community trigger if she wished to do so.
The resident submitted a complaint to the landlord on 22 May 2023 in which she outlined the reports of ASB she had made since September 2021. She said that her neighbour had caused her harassment, alarm and distress by staring at her, intimidating her, banging and shouting. She said that she was unhappy that the landlord had closed her case as the ASB was still ongoing.
The landlord sent its stage 2 reply on 21 June 2023 as it had previously replied to the stage one complaint in December 2021. The stage 2 reply included the following points:
1. The landlord explained that the previous ASB case had been closed in 2021 as the resident had been happy with the resolution and compensation offered. She had then submitted a formal complaint in May 2023 as she said the ASB had continued.
2. The landlord said that as per its complaints policy, it would investigate its handling of the ASB issues dating back 6 months.
3. The landlord said it had provided soft door closers to the neighbour as the resident had reported noise from slamming doors.
4. The resident had contacted the Environmental Health team, however, the landlord had not received any evidence of statutory noise nuisance.
5. The landlord had proposed the use of mediation but this had been declined by the neighbour.
6. The landlord had proposed a good neighbour agreement but this had been declined by the resident.
7. The landlord had therefore closed the ASB case on 9 May 2023 and written to the resident to confirm this.
8. The resident had reported further ASB on 20 June 2023 and the landlord had advised her that it would re-open the case if she could provide further evidence by 28 June 2023.
9. The landlord concluded that it had followed its ASB policy in managing the case and therefore did not uphold the resident’s complaint.
The Ombudsman’s view is that it was reasonable for the landlord to decide to only investigate the resident’s stage 2 complaint by reviewing its handling of the reported ASB over the previous 6 months. The landlord’s complaints and feedback policy states: “We will only accept complaints if they are made within 2 months of when you first became aware of the problem…”. In this case, the resident had made reports of ASB in November 2022 and the landlord had opened a new ASB case at that time. Therefore, this was a reasonable starting point for the landlord’s review of its handling of the reported ASB.
During the remainder of June 2023 and July 2023, the resident reported further incidents of ASB. She submitted several diary sheets and video footage. The landlord reviewed the diary sheets and video footage on 6 July 2023 and concluded that the neighbour had not breached her tenancy and therefore it would not take any further action at that stage. It was appropriate that the landlord had reviewed the further evidence submitted by the resident in a timely manner and advised the resident of its conclusions.
During August to September 2023, the resident reported further ASB incidents to the landlord, including concerns about the neighbour’s dog, which she said was being used by the neighbour to intimidate her son. The evidence shows that during this period, the landlord liaised with the police and provided the resident with noise monitoring equipment.
The resident moved out of the property on 16 December 2023 and reported that the neighbour verbally abused her while she was moving out.
Overall, although the evidence shows that the resident found the reported incidents distressing, the Ombudsman has found that the landlord acted reasonably in managing the reports of ASB because:
1. The landlord interviewed the resident in a timely manner and maintained contact with her while it was investigating the reported ASB.
2. The landlord carried out risk assessments and agreed the actions it would take to investigate the incidents, including interviewing the neighbour.
3. The landlord provided the resident with diary sheets as part of its evidence gathering.
4. The landlord took practical measures to address the resident’s reports of noise, such as providing the neighbour with soft door closers.
5. The landlord liaised with the council’s Environmental Health team and the police.
6. The landlord suggested using mediation and good neighbour agreements as ways of resolving the dispute between the resident and her neighbour.
7. The landlord advised the resident about using the community trigger.
The Ombudsman has found there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of ASB as it followed its policies and procedures and took reasonable action in response to the resident’s reports of ASB.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of anti-social behaviour by her neighbour.